MJ", 9m^ -^li i IVftftjlVW* ■ *r .' mA 1#- % S^5F?»;;vji J UN :iD. D. Dean of St. TaulX and Chaplain in Ordinary to His Majefty. CDe jfifti) eoitioit CD?cceteti anD ameunetr* 2 Pet. I. 1 6. For we have not followed cunningly- devi fed Fables^ when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lordjefus Chrifi, but were eye-witnejfes of his Afajefly. Neque religio ulla fine fapientia fufcipienda efl^ nee ulla fine religione probanda fapientia^ Lattant. de fali! relig. cap. i, L 0 N D 0 JSy Printed by J, K for Henry Mortlock at the Thcenix in St. Vauh Church-ya-rd, md^ttht'fVhhe Hart in JVefi^winfter-Hall, 1680. ^ ^ To his mof t Honoured Friend and Patron, S ROGER BURGOIN, Knight and Baronef. IT was the early felicity of Mofes, when ex- pofed in an Ark of Nilotick papyre, to he adopted into the favour of fo great aperfo^ nage as the Daughter of Pharaoh : Such another Ark is this vindication of the ivritings of that Divine and excellent Perfon expo fed to the world in ; and the great eft ambition of the Author of ity is J to haVe it received into your Patronage and Protection. Sut although the contexture and frame of this Treatife he far belotv the excel- lency and worth of the fubjeEl {as you know the Ark in which Mofes was puty was of bulruflies daubed with flime and pitch) yet when You pleafe to caft your eye on the matter contained in ity you will not think it beneath your Favour, and unworthy, youi Protection. For if Truth he the greateji A 2 Prefent .-The Epillle Dedicatory. Prefent which God could bejlowy or man receive De ifid. & '(^according to that of Plutarch, o^g ^3iv dv^^ci-nc^ then certainly thofe Truths deferye our mojl ready acceptance^ which are in themfelves of greatefl importance^ and haVe the greatefl evidence that they come from God. And although I haVe had the happinefs of fo near relation to YoUy and acquahu tance with YoUy as to know how little You need fuch difcourfes which tend to fettle the Foundations of Religion, which you ha^e raifed fo happy a Super- llruilure upon ; yet ivithal I confider what parti- cular Kindnefs the fouls of all good men hear to fuch DefgnSj whofe end is to affert and Vindicate tiye Trutli and Excellency of Religion. For thofe who are enriched themfehcs ipith the inefli- viahle Treafure of true Goodnefs and ^iety are far from that envious temper y to think nothing Valua- Me but what they are the fole Toffejfors of ; hut fuch are the moft fatisjied themfehesy ivhen they fee others not only admire but enjoy what they ha^e the highefl efttmation of. W^ere all who make a f^ew of ^ligion in the World really fuch as they pretend to bcy difcourfes of this nature would be no ?nore feafonable than the commendations of a great Beau- ty to one who is already a pajjionate admirer of it ; but on the contrary we fee how conmion it is for men The Epiftle Dedicatory. men firji to throw dirt m the face of ^Itgion and then ferfwade themjehes it is its natural Complexi- on y tJ?ey reprefent it to themfehes in a fliape leajl fleajing to them^ and then hring that as a Plea Wrv they^iye it no better entertainment. It may jujlly Jeemftrange^ that true Religion, which contains nothing iji it hut what is truly ^o- ble and Generous, 7710JI rational and plealing to the ipirirs of all good men, fhould yet fuffer fo much in its eft eem m the worlds through thof eft range and uncouth vizards it is reprefented under : Some accounting the life and praBice of it^ as it f peaks fubdiiing our wills to the will of God (which is the fuhftance of all ^ligion) a thing too low and mean for their rank and condition in the Worldy white others pretend a quarrel againft the principles of it as nnfatis factory to Humane reafon. Tims ^^- Wgion Jujfers ivtth the Autlior of it between two Thieves, and it is hard to defne which is moft in- jurious to it J that which queftions the Principles, or that ivhich defpifeth the Pradice of it. And no- thing certainly ivill more incline men to behe'Ve that we live in an Age o/Prodigies,/:/;^m that there fhould he any fuch in the Chriftian World who fiould account it a piece o/Gentilicy to defpije Religion.^?/<^ -apiece of Reafon to be Atheifts. Tor if there be any fuch thing in the World as a true heighth and mag- nani- The Epiftle Dedicatory. nanimity o/fpirit, if there he any folid reafon ani depth o/^ judgment, they are not only confijlent with^ hut only attainahle hy a true generous fpiric of Re- liction. 'But if we look at that which the looje and profane World is apt to account thegreateft gallan- try, ive p^all find it jnade up of fuch pitiful InQvC' dients, which any skilful and rational intnd will he ajhamed to plead for^ much lef^ to 7nention them in competition with true goodnefs and unfeigned ^icty. For how eafie is it to ohjer^e fuch who would he ac- cou?ited the moft high ^m/ gallant fpirits, to quar- ry on fuch mean preys which only tend to fatisfe their hrutifh appetites^ or flefli revenue with the blood of fuch who ha^e flood in the way of that aery title j Honour! Or elfethey are Jo little ap-^ prehenjhe of the inward worth and excellency of hu- tnane nature^ that they feem to enyy the gallantry 0/ Peacocks, and ftriVe to outyy them in the gaety of their V\umcs\ fuch ivho are^ as Scncczfiithy ad fimilitudinem parietum fuorum extrinfecus culti, who imitate the walls of their houfcs in the fairnefs of the outfides, hut matter not what rub- bifli there lies within. The utrnoft of their amhi- tton is to attain enervatam fclicicatem c|uA pcr- madefcunt animi, fuch a felicity as evigorates. the foul hy too long ileeping, it heing the nature of all terrefirial pleajures that they do c'/.-A^n^iv Kj ai'j- The Epiftle Dedicatory. y^vQdv TO (p^vhy hy degrees confume reafon hy efFeminating and foftning the Intellectuals. Mujl we appeal then to the judgment of Sardanapalus con- cerning the nature o/Felicity, or enquire of Apici- us what temperance is ? or deftre that Sybarite to define Magnanimity, who fainted to fee a man at hard labour ? Or doth now the conqueft of paflfions, forgi- ving injuries, doing good, felf denial, humility, patience under crolfes, which are the real exprejji- ons of piety, fpeak nothing ?nore noble and gene- rous than a luxurious, malicious^proud, and im- patient fpirit ? Is there nothing more becoming and agreeable to the foul of many in exemplary Pi- ety, and a Holy well ordered Converfation,/:/;^?^ in the ligh^nefs and vanity (not to fay rudenef? and debaucheries) of thofe whom the world accounts the greatefl gallants ? Is there nothing more graceful and pleafing in the fweetnefs, candour, and in- genuity of a truly Chriftian temper anddifpofv tionjthanin the revengeful, implacable fpirit o/' fuch whofe Honour li^es and is fed hy the Blood of their enemies ? Is it not more truly honourable and glorious toferye that God who commands the Worlds than to he a flaVe to thofe paflions and lulls ivhich put men upon continual hard ferVtce^ and torment them for it when they ha^e done tt ? Were there no- thing The Fpiftle Dedicatory. 7tone who heartily helieve the Scriptures to he tht^ Word oiGodyUnd that the matters repealed therein are infallibly true, will eyer haVe the lefs ejlimation of it. It 7nufl he confejfedthat the credit o/Religion hath 7nuchfuffered tn the Age we liVe in throng-) the yain pretences of many toit^ who ha^e only aEleda part in it for the fake of fome private interefls of their own. And it is the ufual Logick of Atheifts, crimine ab uno Difce omnes ; // there he any hypocrites, all who make fhew of Religion, are Juchy on which account the Hypocrifie of one Age makes way for the Atheifm of the next. ^ut how unreafonahle and unjuft that imputation isy there needs not much to difcoVer^ unlefs it he an argument there are no true men in the World^ hecaufe there are fo many Apes which imitate them j or that there are no Jewels, hecaufe there are fo many Counterfeits. Jnd hleffed he Gody our Age is not barren of inflances of real goodnefs and un- affeSled piety ; there being fome fuch generous fpirits as dare loVe Religion without the dowry of Intereft, and manifeft their affeElion to it in the plain drefs of the Scriptures, without the paint and fet-offs which are added to it by the federal contending parties of the Chriftian World. Were there more fuch noble fpirits of Religion in our Age, Atheifm would want one of the greatefi Pleas The Epiftle Dedicatory. Pleas tphich it mm makes againji the Truth of Religion 3 for nothing enlarges ?nore the Gulf of Atheifm, than that ^yz yd^r^.^ that wide paf f^ge which lies between the Faith and L'lYCS of men pretending to he Chriftians. J mufl needs fay there is nothing feems more ftrange and unaccount- able to mey than that the Pradlice of the unquefti- onahle duties of Chriftianity jhould he put out of Countenance, or flighted by any who own^ pro- fefs, and contend /or the Principles of it. Can the profejfion of that he honourable, whofe pra- ctice is not ? If the principles be true, why are .they not pra6tifed ? If they be not true, why are they profeffed ? ToufeCy Sir, to what an unexpeBed length my dejtre to vindicate the Honour as well as Truth of Religion, hath drawn out this prefent addrefs. (But I may fooner hope for your pardon in itj than if I had fpent fo much paper after the ujual man- ner of Dedications, in reprefenting You to Your [c\( or the World. Sir, I know You hay e too much o/that I haye been commending^ to delist in Your own deferred praifes, much lefs in flatteries, which fo benign a fuhjeB might eajtly make ones pen run over in. . And therein I might not much haye digreffed from my deftgn^ face I know few tnore exemplary for that r^re mixture of true piety, ( h z ) and The Epiftle Dedicatory. and the higheji civility together ^ hi whom that in- ejlimahle jewel of Religion is placed in a mojl fweet^ ajf alley and obliging temper, ^ut although none mil he more ready on any occajton with all gratitude to acknowledge the great obligations You haye laid upon me-^ yet I am fo far Jenftbk of the common "Vanity of Epiftles Dedicatory, that I cannot fo heartily comply with them in any things as in my hearty prayer to Almighty God for your good and welfare, and in fnbfcribing my Sir, Your moft humble and jHm 5. 1662. affcdionate fervant. Ed. Stillingfleet THE y THE PREFACE TO THE EA T is neither to fatisfie the importunity of friends, nor to prevent faife copies ( which and fuch Uke excufes I know are expedited in ufual Prefaces ) that I have adventured a- broad this following Treatift : but it is out of a juft refentment of the ailronts and indignities which have been cafl dn Religion ; by fuch, who account it a matter of judgment to disbelieve the Scriptures, and a piece of wit to difpute themfelves out of the poflibility of being happy in another world : When yet the more acute and fubtile their arguments are, the greater their flrength is againft themfelves, it being impoffible there ftiould be fb much wit and fubtilty in the fouls of men, w^ere they not of a more excellent nature than they ima- gine them to be. And how contradidlious is it for luch perfons to be ambitious of being cried up for wit and reafon, whofe defign is to degrade the ra- tional \ The preface to the ^ader. tlona! foul fo far below her felf, as to make her be- come hke the beads that perifli ! If now the weight and confequence of the fubjed:, and the too great fl feafonablenefs of it ( if the common fame of the ^ large fpread of Atheifm among us be t-rue ) be not fufficient Apology for the publifliing this Book, I ; am refolved rather to undergo thy cenfiire, than \ be beholding to any other. The intendment there- fore of this Preface is only to give a brief account of the (cope, defign, and method of the following Books, although the View of the Contents of the Chapters might fufRciently acquaint thee witli it. How far I have been either from tranfcribing, or a defign to exculs out of the hands of their admirers, the feveral writings on the behalf of Religion in general, or Chriftianity in particular (efpecially Mornyy Grotius^ Amyraldus^ &c. ) may eafily appear by comparing what is contained in their Books^nd this together. Had I not thought fbmething might m be faid, if not more fully and rationally, yet more fuitably to the prefent temper of this Age than what is already written by them, thou hadfl; not been troubled with this Preface, much left with the whole Book. But as the tempers and Genius's of Ages and Times alter, fb do the arms and weapons which Atheifts imploy againft Religion ; the moft popular pretences of the Atheifts of our Age, hav^ been the irreconcilablenefs of the account of Times in Scrip- ture, with that of the learned and ancient Heathen Nations ; the inconfiftency of the belief of the Scrip- tures with the principles of reafon : and the account which may be given of the Origin of things from principles of Pliilofophy without the Scriptures: Thefe three therefore I have particularly let my felf againft, T7;e preface to the ^ader. againft, and dIrecSted againft each of them a feverai Book. In the firft I have manifefled that there is no ground of credibility in the account of ancient times given by any Heathen Nations different from the Scriptures, which I have with fo much care and di- ligence enquired into, that from thence we may hope to hear no more of men before A^am to fah^e the Authority of the Scriptures by, which yet was intended only as a defign to undermine them ,• but I have not thought the tr-ivolous pretences of the Au- thor of that Hypothefis worth particular mention- ing, fuppofing it fuiBcient to give a clear account of things without particular citation of Authors^ where it was not of great concernment for under- ftanding the thing it felf. In the fecond Book I have undertaken to give a rational account of the grounds, why we are to believe thofe feveral perfbns, who in feveral ages were imployed to reveal the mind of God to the world, and with greater particularity than hath yet been ufed, I have infilled on the per- fons of MofeSj and the Prophets, our Saviour and his Apoftles, and in every of them manifefled the rational evidences on which they were to be believed, not only by the men of their own Age, but by thofe of fucceeding Generations. In the third Book I have infilled on the matters themfelves which are either fuppofed by, or revealed in the Scriptures ; and have therein not only manifefled the certainty of the foundations of all Religion which lie in the Being of God and Immortality of the foul, but the undoubted truth of thofe particular accounts concerning the Origin of the Univerfe, of Evil, and of Nations, which were mofl liable to the Atheifls exceptions^ and have therein confidered all the pretences of Phi- lofophy The preface to the <]^ader. lofophy ancient or modern, which have {eenied to contradid: any of them ; to which ( matittfce loco ) I tiave added the evidence of Scripture-Hiftory in the remainders of it in Heathen Mythology, and concluded all w^ith a difcourfe of the excellency of the Scriptures. Thus having given a brief view of the defign and method of the whole, I fubmit it to every free and unprejudiced judgment. All the favour then I fliall requeft of thee, is, to read ferioufly, and judge impartially ; and then I doubt not but thou wilt fee as much reafon for Religion as I do. / THE THE contents; m BOOK L CHAP. I. • The obfcurity and defed of Ancient Hiftory. THE knowledge of truth proved to be the mo ft natural perfection of the rational foul ; yet error often miftaken for truth ; the accounts of it. Want of diligence in . its fear ch^ the mixture of truth and falfhood : Thence comes either rejeBing truth for the error's fake, or embracing the error for the truth's fake ; the firfl inflamed in Heathen. Thilofophers, the fecond in vulgar Heathen, Of Thilofophi- cal Atheifm^ and the grounds of it. The Hiftory of Antiquity very obfcure. The queftion ftated where the true Hiftory of ancient times is to be founds in Heathen Hiftories^ or only in Scripture f The want of credibility in Hathen Hiftories af- ferted and proved by the general defeB for want of timely re- cords among Heathen Nations ; the reafon of it /hewed from the firft Plantations of the World, The manner of them dif- covered. The Original of Civil Government. Of Hierogly- phicks. The ufe of letters among the Greeks no elder rhan Cadmus, his time enquired into, no elder than Jolhua, the learning brought into Greece by hini, page i (<) CHAP. The Contents. CHAP. ir. Of the Vbmician and zy£gyptian Hiftory, 7he particular defeB in the Hiftory of the moft learned Uea- then Nations. Firft the Phoenicians. 0/ Sanchoniathon, • . his Antiquity^ and fidelity. Of Jerom-baal, Baal-Berith. The Antiquity of Tyre. Scaliger vindicated againft Bo- chartus Abibalus. The vanity of Phoenician Theology, The imitation of it hy the Gnofticks. Of the ^Egyptian Hiftory, The Antiquity and Authority of Hermes Trifmegiftus. Of his hfcriptions on VillarSy tranfcribed hy Manetho. His Fabuloufnefs thence difcovered. Terra Seriadica. Of SethV TilJars in Jofephus, and an account whence they are taken. CHAP. III. Of the Chaldean Hiftory. The conteft of Antiquity among Heathen Nations^ and the ways of deciding it. Of the Chaldean Aftrology^ and the founda- tion of Judicial Aft ro logy. Of the Zabii, their FoU7ider^ who they were^ no other than the old Chaldees. Of Berofus and his Hiftory, An account of the fabulous Dynafties of Berofus and Manetho. From the Tranjlation of the Scripture hiftory into Greek in the time of Ptolomy. Of that Tran- flat ion and the time of it. Of Demetrius Phalereus. Sca- ligerV arguments anfwered. Manetho writ after theScptua- gint^ proved againft Kircher j his arguments anfwered. Of ' Rabbinical and Arabick Authors^ and their little credit in matter of hiftory. The time of Berofus enquired into, his writing co-temporary with Philadelphus. pag. 3 7 CHAP. The Contents, CHAP. IV. The defeft of the Graecian Hiftory. That manifefted by three evident arguments of it, i. The fa^ buloufnefs of the Poetical age of Greece. The Antiquity of •Poetry Of Orpheus and the ancient Toets. whence the Toetical Fables borrowed. The advancement of Poetry and Idolatry together /> Greece. The different cenfures ofStvdbo iiW Eratofthenes concerning the Poetical age of Qxttc^^ and thereafons of them. a. The eldefi Hifio'rians of Greece ^r^ of fufpeBed credit. Of Damafles, Arifireus, a?d others ; of the moft of their eldefl Hiflorians we have nothing left hut their names ^ of ethers only the fubjeBs they treated of and fome fragments. 3. Thofi that are extant^ either confefs their ignorance of eld eft times ^ or. plainly difcover it. Of the firft fort are Thucydides and Plutarch ; fever al evidences of the Grecians Ignorance of the true original of Nations. Of Herodotus arJ his miftakes ; the Greeks ignorance in Geogra- phy difcovered, and thence their infiiffciency a^ to an account of ancient hiftory. pag. 52 CHAP. V. The general uncertainty of Heathen Chronology. The want of credibility in Heathen Hiftory further proved from the uncertainty and confufion in their accounts of ancient times \ that dlfcovered by the uncertain form of their years. An en- quiry into the different forms of the f why pr editions are accounted an evidence of Divine rev el a- < tion. Three Con fe claries drawn thence. The fecond, the manner of God's revelation of his will to the mmds of the Prophets, Of the fever al degrees of Prophecy, The third ^, that God did not always reveal the internal purpofes of his- ^ will unto the true Vrophets. The grand que ji ion propounded how it may be known when predi^ipns exprefs God's decrees y and when only the feries of caufes. For thefirfi^ fever al rules laid down. i. PFfjen the pre diB ion is confirmed by a prefent miracle, 2. when the things foretold exceed the probability of fecond caufes, 3 . J4^hen confirmed by God^s oath, 4. When the blefftngs foretold are purely fpiritual. Three rules for in- terpreting the Prophecies which refpeB the fiat e of things un- der the Gofpel. 5. fVhen all circumfiances are foretold, 6. when r^any Prophets in fever al ages agree in the fame pre- diBions, PrediBions do not exprefs God's unalterable purpo* feSj when they only contain comminations of judgments., or are prediciions of temporal blejjings, Tte cafe of the Ninevites^ Hezekiah, and others opened. Of repentance in God^ what it implies. The Jewifh objeBions about prediciions of tempo- ral blejjings anfwered. In what cafes miracles were expected from the Prophets, when they were to confirm the truth of their religion. Injlanced in the Prophet at Bethel, Elijah, ■ Elifha, and of MoCqs himfelf -, whoje divine authority that it was proved by miracles, is demonjirated againji the modern '^fewsy and their pretences anfwered, pag. 165 CHAP. The Contents. CHAP. VII. The eternity of the Law of Mofes dilcuffed. The fecond cafe wherein miracles may be expe^ed, when a Di- vine pofitive Law is to be repealed, and another way of wor- fljip ejfablijhed inflead of it. The poffibility in general of a repeal of a Divine Law ajferted : the particular cafe of the Law of Moles difputed againfi the ^jews \ the matter of that Law proved not to be immutably obligatory ; becaufe the cere^ monial pr-ecepts were required not for themfelves, but for fome further end ^ that proved from M^imomdQS his confejfton: the precepts of the Ceremonial Law frequently difpenfed with while the Law was in force. Of the Fajfover of Hezekiah, and feveral other inflames. It is not inconpftent with the wifdom of God to repeal fuch an eftablifhed Law, AbravanelV arguments anfwered. Of the perfeUion of the Law of Mofes, compared with the Gofpel. Whether God hath ever declared he would never repeal the Law of Mofes. Of adding to the precepts. Of the exprejfions feeming to imply the perpetuity of the Law of Mofes. Reafons affigned why thofe exprejjions are ufed^ though perpetuity be not implied. TJje Law of Moles • not built upon immutable reafon^ becaufe many particular pre- cepts were founded upon particular occafions, as the cufioms of the Zabii ; many ceremonial precepts thence deduced out of Maimonides j and becaufe fuch a fl ate of things was foretold^ with which the obfervation of the Ceremonial %L.aw would be inconfjftent. That largely difcovered fi-cm the Vrophecies of the oldTefiament, pag. 191 CHAR The Contertts.^ CHAP. VIIL General Hypothefes concerning the Truth of the Doarine of Chrift. 7'he great prejudice againji our Saviour among Jem and Hea- thens^ was the meannefs of his appearance. Tl)e difference of the miracles at the delivery of the Law and GofpeL Some general Hypothefes to clear the fuhferviency of miracles to the DoBrine of Chrifi. i. That where the truth of a doBrine depends not on evidence^ hut authority^ the only way to prove the truth ef the DoBrine, is to prove the Teflimony of the revealer to be infallible. Things may be true which depend not on evidence of the things, what that is., and on what it depends. The uncertainty of naturd knowledge. The ex- iftence ef God, the foundation of all certainty. The certainty of matters of faith proved from the fame principle. Our knowledge of any thing fuppofeth fomething tncomprehenfible^ The eertainty of faith a^ great cu, that of knowledge ; the .grounds of it ftronger. The confifiincy of rational evidence with faith. Tet objects of faith exceed reafon ; the abfurdities following the contrary opinion. The uncertainty of that which is called reafon. Fhilofophical dictates no fiandard of reafon. Of tranfubfiantiation and ubiquity, &c. why rejected as con- trary to reafon. The foundation of faith in matters above rea- fon. which is an infallible Tefiimony ; that there are ways to know which is infallible, proved. 2. Hypoth. A Divine Te- fiimony the mofi infallible. The refolution of faith into God's veracity as its formal objeB. 3. Hypoth. A Divine Tefiimony may be known, though God fpeak not immediately. Of iyifpi- ration among the Jews, and Divination among the Heathens. 4. Hypoth. The evidences of a Divine Tefiimony mufi be clear .and certain. Of the common motives of faith, andthe obligati- en to faith arifingfrom them. The original of Infidelity, p.21 1 (d) CHAR The Contents, Chap, ix. The tational evidence of the Truth of Chriftian Religion from Miracles. The pojfihility of miracles appears fi-om God and providence ; the evidence of a Divine Teftimony by them. God alone can really alter the courfe of nature. The Devil's power of working miracles confideied. Of Simon Magus, Apollonius. The ■ cures in the Temple of /Efculapius at Rome, &c, Codnever works miracles^ but for fome particular end. The particular reafons of the miracles of Chrift, The repealing the Law of Mofes, Tfhich had been fetled by miracles. Why Chrift checked the Fharifeesfor demanding a Jign^ when himfelf appeals to his miracles. The power of Chrift' s miracles on many who did not throughly believe. Chrift'' s miracles made it evident that he ■ was the Meffms^ becaufe the predi^ions were fulfilled in him. Why John Baptifl: wrought no miracles, Chrift' s miracles necejfary for the overthrow of the Devil's Kingdom. Of the- Demoniacks and Lunaticks in the Gofpely and in the Primitive Church, The power of the name of Chrift over them largely proved by fever al Teftimonies, The evidence thence of a Di- vine power in Chrift, Of counj^erfeit difpofeffions. Of mi- racles wrought among Infidels. Of the future ft ate of the Church, The necejjity of the miracles of Chrift, as to the propagation of Chriftian Religion: that proved from the con- dition of the pubUJhers, and the fuccefs of the DoBri?ie. The jlpoftles knew the hazard of their imployment, before they en- tred on it. The boUnefs and refolution of the Apoftles not- withftanding this, compared with heathen Philofophers, 'No motive could carry the Apoftles through their imployment, but the truth of their DoBrine, not feeking the honour, profit or pleafure of the world. The Jpoftles evidence of the truth of their doBrine lay in being eye-witnejfes of our Saviour's mi- racles and refurrcBion. That attefted by themfelves ; their fufficiency thence for preaching the Gofpel, Of the nature of the doBrine of the Gofpel; contrariety of it to natural inclina- tions. Strange fuccefs of it, notwithftanding it came not with humane The Contents. humane power: No Chriftian Emperor^ till the Gofpel unL ' verfally preached. The weaknefs and ftmplicity of the inftru-. ments which preached the GofpeL From all which the great evidence of the power of miracles is proved, pag. 23 j CHAP. X The difference of true miracles from falfe. The mreafonablenefs of rejeBing the evidence from miracles, be^ caufe of impofiures. That there Are certain rules of difiin^ guijhingtrue miracles from falfe, and Divine from diabolical, proved from God's intention in giving a power of miracles, and the providence of God in the world. The inconvenience of taking away the rational grounds of faith and placing it on felf- evidence. Of the felf evidence of the Scriptures, and the in- fufficiency of that for refolving the queflion about the authority of the Scriptures, Of the pretended miracles of Impofiors and falfe Chrifis, a^ Barchochebas, David el-David, and o- thers. The rules whereby to judge true miracles from falfe, I, True Divine miracles are wrought to confirm a Divine te- flimony. No miracles necejfary for the certain conveyance of a Divine Tefiimony ; proved fi^om the evidences that the Scrip- tures could not be corrupted, i. No miracles Divine which eontradici Divine revelation. Of Popifi miracles. 3. Di- vine miracles leave Divine effetison thofe who believe them. Of the miracles of Simon Magus. 4. Divine miracles tend to the overthrow of the Devil's power in the world : the anti- pathy of the dotlrine of Chrifi to the devil's defigns in the world. 5. The diftinclion of true miracles from others, fi-om the circumflances and manner of their operation. The mira- cles of Chrifi compared with thofe of the Heathen Gods, 6, God makes it evident to all impartial judgments that Di- vine mir a} les exceed created power. This manifefted from the imparallelld miracles of Mofes and our Saviour. From all which the rational evidence of . Divine revelation is manifefted, AS to the perfons whom God imploys to teacjo the i^orld. p. 5 1 2 (It) BOOK The Gententsi BOOK III. CHAP. I. . . Of the Being of God. The Trincipks of all Religion lie in the Being of God and, im" mortality of the foul: from them the necejfity of a particular "Divine revelation rationally deduced \ the method laid down for proving the Divine authority of the Scriptures, Pf'hy Mo- fcs deth not prove the Being ofGod^ but fuppofe it. The notion of a Deity very confonant to reafon. Of the nature of Idea'^s^ and particularly of- the Idea of God, How we can form m Idea of an infinite Being, How far fuch an Idea argues ex- ijience. The great unreafonablenefs of Atheifm demonfirated. Of the Hypothefes of Ariftotelian and Epicurean Atheifls, The Athetfls pretences examined and refuted. Of the nature of the arguments whereby we prove there is a God. Ofuniver- fal confent and the evidence of that to prove a Deity and im- mortality of fouls. Of necejfity ofexifience implied in the no' tion of Gody and how far that proves the Being of God, The order of the world and ufefulnefs of the parts of it, and efpeci^ ally of maris body, an argument of a Deity. Some higher principle proved to be in the world than matter and motion^ The nature of the foul, and poffibility of its fubftjling after death. Strange appearances in nature not folvableby the power of imagination, ^ pag. 337 CHAP. IT. Of the Origin of the Univerfe. The necejfity of the belief of the creation of the world in order to the truth of Religion, Of the fever al Hypothefes of the Philofophers who eontradi^ Mofes : with a particular exami- nation of them. The ancitnt tradition of the world confo- vant to Mofts : proved from tbi Jmck Vhilofophy of Thaks, and The Contents. * and the Jtalick of Pythagoras. The Vythagoridt Cahahra- ther zy€gypttan than Mofaick Of the fluid matter which wm the material principle of the Vniverfe. Of the Hypothefss of the eternity of the world ajferted by Ocellus Lucanus, a^d Ariftotle. The weaknefs of the foundations on which that opinion is built. Of the manner of forming principles ofTbilo- fophy. The poj/ibility of creation-proved. No arguing from the prefent fiate of the world againft its beginning., fiewed from Maimonides. The Platonifts arguments from the goodnefs of God for the eternity of the world anfwered. Of the Stoical Hy- pothefes of the eternity of matter ; whether reconcilable with the text of Mofes. Of the opinions of Plato and Pythagoras concerning the pra-exifience of matter to the formation of the world. The contradi^ion of the eternity of matter to the na- ture and attributes of God. Of the Atomical Hyp ot hefts of the Origin of the Vniverfe. The PVorld could not be produ- ced by a cafual consourfe of Atoms proved from the nature and motion- of Epicurus his Atoms ^ and the Thanomiena of the Vniverfe y cfpecially the produEtion and nature of Animals, of the Cartefian Hypothefis^ that it cannot falve the Origin of the Vniverfe without a Deity giving motion to mat-, * t^r, pag. 394 ;c HA P. in; Of the Origin of Evil Of the Being of Trovidence, Epicurus his arguments againft it refuted. The necejjjty of the belief of Trovidence in order to Religion, Providence proved from a confederation of the na- ture of God and the things of the world. Of the Spirit of na- ture. The great objeB ions againft Trovidence propounded. The firft concerns the Origin of evil, God cannot be the author of fin if the Scriptures be true. The account which the Scrip- tures give of the fall of man^ doth not charge God with man^s fault. Gods power to govern man by Laws, though he gives no particular reafon of every Tofttive precept. The reafon of God's creating man with freedom ofwill^ largely fhewed from Simplicius ; and the true account of the Origin of evil. God's permitting the fall makes him not the author of it. The ac- count The Contents. coufit which the Scriptures give of the Origin of evti, com- pared with that of Heathen Philofophers. The antiquity of the opinion of afcribivg the Origin of evil to an evil principle. Of the judgment of f/?^? Perfians, .Egyptians and others j- bout it. Of Manichaifm, The opinion of the ancient Greek Fhihfophers 'y of Vyth^gov2iS, Plato, the Stoicks; the Ori- gin of evil not from the necejjity of matter. The remainders of the hijiory of the fall among the Heathens. Of the ma- lignity of Daemons. Providence vindicated as to the fuffer- ings of the good, and impunity of bad men. An account of both from natural lights manifejled by Seneca, Plutarch, and others, pag. 441 CHAP. IV. Of the Origin of Nations. All mankind derived from Adam, // the Scriptures be true. The contrary fupp option an introduction to Atheifm. The truth of the Hiftory of the Flood. The pofjthility of an univerfal deluge proved. The Flood univerfal a^ to mankind, whether univerfal a^ to the Earth and Animals ; no necejfity of averting either. 7et fuppofing itythe poffihility of it demonftrated without credti- on of new waters. Of the Fountains of the deep. The proportion which the height of Mountains hears to the Diameter of the Earth. No Mountains much above three mile perpendicular. Of the Origin of Fountains, The opinion of Ariftotle and others concerning it difiuffed. The true account of them from the va- pours arifingfiom the mafs of fubterraneom waters. Of the Ca- pacity of the Ark for receiving the Animals, from Buteo and others. The truth of the deluge from the Teftimony of Heathen Nations. Of the propagation of Nations fi-om '^odh's pofierity. Of the beginning of the Aflyrian Empire. The multiplication of mankind after the Flood. Of the Chronology of the LXX. Of the time between the Flood and Abraham, and the advantages of it. Of the pretence of fuch Nations, who called themfe Ives Aborigines. Adifcourfe concerning thefirfl Plantation ^ha, [xjovov iKenvov r ojtpo- CK^-mvlA «V nm tm ^uV« cfojc^ 01/ ft;c^7ry^,as the ikmQPhilofopher (peaks, the refemblances and reprefentations of the things ^ it muft need follow, that where there was a true knowledge, the conceptions mull agree with the things ; and words being to exprefs our conceptions^ none are fb«fit to do it, as tliofe which are expreffive of the feveral natures of the things they are ufed to reprefent. For otherwife all the ufe of words is to be a mecr vocabulary to the underftanding, and an Index to memory y and of no further ufe in the purfuit of knowledge^ than to let us know what words men are agreeU to call things by. But fomething further feems to be intended in their fird im- In Cen.i. 19. pofitiony whence the Jews call it lD^^QH pVidh as Mercer tells us, a feparation and diftinBion of the feveral kinds of things : Oedip. Egypt, and Kirchsr thus paraphrafed the words ofMofes. Andwhat^ Tom. 2. claff.2. fiever Adam called every living creature ^ that was the name there- ^^^ '* ^f-i i- ^- ^^ith he, Fuerunt illis vera & germ an a nomina & re- rum naturis proprie accommodata. But however this be, we have this further evidence of that height of knowledge which muft be fuppofed in the firft man^. that as he was the firfl in his kind, fo he was to be the ft andard and me&fure of all that followed, and therefore could not want any thing of the due perfections of humane nature. And as the fljekel of the SdnBu- ary was, if not double to others, (as men ordinarily miftake) yet of a full and exa^l weight, becaufe it was to be the ftan- dard for all other weights (which was the caufe of its being kept •-^ Chap. I. the Truth of Scripture Hijlory ajferted, f kept in the Temple.) So if the firft man had not double the proportion and meafure of knowledge which his pofterity hath, if it was not running over in regard of abundance, yet it muft be pre fed down and Jhaken together in regard of weighty elle he would be a very un^t fiandard for us to judge by, concerning the due and fui table perfeBions of humane nature. But we need not have run ^o far back as the firft man to ^^<^. 4, evince the knowledge of fr«r/; to be the moft mtural perfeSlion of the foul of man ; for even among the prefent ruines of hu- mane nature we may find fbme fuch noble and generom fpirits, that difcern fo much beauty in the face of truth, that to fuch as (hould enquire what they find fo attraBive in it, their an- fwer would be the fame with Ariftotle's in a like cafe, it w^as 7v^A» Ifcowf^y the ^e(tion of thofe w^ho never faw it. For ^ . fb pleafmg is the enquiry , and fo fati^faBory the finding of ^r^^/; after th^ fearch, that the r^/zy/? of it doth far ^xr^^i the great- efl: Epicurifm of Jpicim^ or the moft coftly entertainments of Cleopatra *, there being no Guft (b exquifite as that of the mindy nor any Jewels to be compared with Truth. Nor do any per- fons certainly better deferve the name of men, than fuch who allow their reafi)n a full employment, and think not the ere^- nefs of man's ftature a fufficient diftin^ion of him from Brutes, Of which thole may be accounted only a higher fpecies w'ho can patiently fuffer the imprifonment of their IntelleBuals in a Dungeon of Ignorance, and know themfelves to be men, only by thole CharaBers by which Alexander knew himlelf not to be a C7^ii, by their pronenefs to intemperance and fleep. So ftrange a Metempfychofts may there be without any change of bodies, and Euphorbus his foul might become a Brute, with- out ever removing its lodging into the body of an Jfs, So ra-uch will the foul degenerate from it felf, if not improved, and in a kind of fullennefs fcarce appear to be what it is, becaule it is dot improv d to what it may be. i^ut if this knowledge of truth be fo great, fo natural, fo valu- SeB, 5. able a perfeBion of humane nature, whence comes fo much of the ObjeB, world to be over-run with Ignorance and Barbarifm, whence come fo many pretenders to knowledge, to court a cloud inftead o/Juno, to pretend a Love to truth, and yet to fall down and worfhip er- ror ? If there were fo great a fympathy between the foul and truth, there would be an impatient clefire after it, and a moft ready em- bracing 6 Origines Sacne : Book I. bracing and dofing with it. We fee the Magnet doth not draw the Iron with greater force than it feems to run with impatience i)2to its clofefi embraces. If there had been formerly fo intimate an acquaintance between the foul and truth , iu Socrates fanfted of friends in the other world, there would be an harmonious do- fure upon the firfi appeara?2ce^ and no divorce to be after made between them ? 'jinfw. True, but then we muft Confider there is an interm.ediate jiate between the former acquaintance, and the renewal of it, wherein all thofe remaining charaBers of mutual knowledge are funk fo deep, and lie ib hid, that there needs a new fire to be kindled to bring forth thofe latent figures, and make them again appear legible. And when once thofe tokens are produ- .. ced of the former friendjhip, there are not more impatient longings, nor more clofe embraces between the touched needh and the Magnet, than there are between the underfl anding and difcovered truth. But then withall, we are to confider that they are but few whole /t?;/// are awakened out of that Lethargy they are fallen into in this degenerate coridition^ the moft are fo pleafed with Xhdv fleep, that they are loth to dijiurb their reft, and fet a higher price upon a lazy Ignorance, than upon a reft^ lefs. Knowledge. And even of thofe whofe fduls are as it were h^tWQQn fieeping and waking, what by reafon of the remaining sonfufeon of tho fpecies in their brains, what by the prefent dim- nefs of their yi^k, and the hovering uncertain light they are to judge by, there are few that can put a difference between a mttv phantafm and a real truth. Of which thefe rational ac-- counts ijiay be given , viz. ivhy fo few pretenders to knowledge do light on truth. Se^, 6, Firft , Want of an impartial diligence in the fearch of it. Truth now muft be fought, and that with care and diligence, before we find it ; Jewels do not ufe to lie upon xht fur face of the . earth : High-ways are feldom paved with Gold -, what is moft worth our Finding, calls for the greatefi fearch. If one that walks the fireets fliould find fome ineftimable Jewel, or one that travels the road meet with a bag of gold, It would be but a filly defign of any to walk the fireet, or travel the road in hopes to meet with fuch a pur chafe to make them rich. If fome have happily light on fome valuable truths when they minded nothing lefs than them, muft this render a diligence ufelefs in inquiries Ghap. I. The truth of Scripture- Hijlory ajferted, 7' inquiries after fuch ? No : Truths though (he be fo fair and pleafing as to draw our aJfeciionSy is yet fo rnodefi as to admit of being courted ^ and, it may be, deriy the firfl: fuit, to heighten our importunity. And certainly nothing hath oftner forbid -^ the banes between the Vnderftanding and Truth inquired after, than partiality znd pre-occupation of Judgment : which makes men enquire more diligently af:er the dovpry than the beauty- of Truth , its correfpondency to their Interefis^ than its evidence to their underftandings. An ufeful error hath often kept the Keys of the mind for free admijjion, when important truths but contrary to thdv pre-conceptions or inter efts have been forbidden /. entrance. Prejudice is the wrong ^/^/f of the foul, that efFedu- -^j- ally keeps it from coming near the r?2^r^ of truth , nay, fets it at the greateft diftance from it. There are few in the world ^ that look after truth with their own eyes^ moft m.ake ufe oifpe- Backs of others making , which m.akes them fo feldom behold the proper lineaments in the face of Truth ; which the feveral t injures from education^ authority ^ cuftom znd pre-diJpofetioH do exceedingly hinder men from difcerning of; Another reafon why there are fo few who find Truth, when SeB. 7-, fo many pretend to feek it, is, That near refemblance which Er- ror often bears to Truth. It hath been well obferved^ that Er- ror feldom walks abroad the world in her own raiments-, llie always borrows fbmething oi Truth , to make her more accep- table to the world. It hath been always Xh^fubtilty 0^ grand de- ceivers to graft their greateft errors on fbme material truths ^. to make th^m pafs more undifcernable to all fuch who look more at the root on which they fta7id^ than on the fruits which they bring forth. It will hereafter appear how moft of the grofs- eft of the Heathen errors have, as Tlutarch faith of the ^Aigyp- tian fables^ diJ-vJ^^.^ nvaf i{/.(pdffii '^ ^An-d-giV?, fome faint and ob- fcure refemblances of truth j nay more than fo, as moft pernici- om weeds are bred in the fatteft foils , their moft deftruBive principles have been founded on fome necefary and important truths. Thw^ Idolatry doth. {Vi'^^ok th^ belief 0^ thtexiftence of a Deity \ and Superftition the immortality of the fouls of men. The Devil could never have built his Chapels , but on the fame ground whereon God's Temples ftood ; which makes me far lef^ wonder than many do, at the meeting with many exprejftons concerning thefe two grand truths in the writings of 8 . Origines Sacrce : Book I. of ancient Heathens^ knowing how willing the Devi! might be to have fuch principles ilill owned in the world, which by his depraving of them might be the nourifhers of Idolatry and Super - ftition. For the general knowledge of a Divine nature^ fuppo- ling men ignorant of the true God, did only lay ?i foundation to ere^ his idolatrom Temples upon *, and the belief of the foul^s furviving the Z>oJ)' after death , without knowledge of the true way of attaining happinefs, did make men /;zi?r^ eager of embra- cing thofe jRzVfi and Ceremonies , which came with a pretence of fliewing the -r^j)/ to a bleffed immortality, Se^, 8. Which may be a moft probable reafon why Thilofophy and Idolatry did increafe fo much together as they did 5 for though right reafon fully improved, would have overthrown all thofe curled and idolatrom praSlices among the Heathens ; yet reafon only dilcerning fome general notions without their particular application and improvement, did only difpofe the molt ordina- ry fort of people to a more ready entertainment of the moft grofs Idolatry. For hereby they difcerned the neceffjty 0^ ibruQ kind of worjhip , but could not find out the right way of it, and therefore they greedily followed that which was commended to them, by fuch who did withall agree with them in the com- mon fentiments of humane nature : Nay, and thole perfons themfelves who were the great maintainers of thcfQ fublimer mt ions coiKQvmng G'^i and th^ fiul of man, were either the great Infiruments of advancing that horrid fuperfiition among them , as Orpheus and Apollonim , or very forward Complyers with it, as many of the Fhilofophers were. Although withall it cannot be denied to have been a wonderfull difcovery of Divine providence , by thefe general notions to keep waking the inward fenfes 0^ mens fouls , that thereby it might appear when Divine revelation fhould be manifefted to them, that it brought nothing contrary to the common principles of humane nature, but did only rettife the depravations of it, arid clearly fliew men that way which they had long been ignora"ntly feeking af- ter. Which was the excellent advantage the j^pofile made of tlie Infcription on the Altar at Athens to the unknown God ; A£l. 17. 23. J^hom , faith he, ye ignorantly ferve, him I declare unto you. And which was the happy ufe the Vrimitive learned Chrifiians made of all t\\o(b paffages concerning Xht divine nature, and the Immortality of tht fouls of men, which they found in the Hea- then Chap. I . The Truth of Scripture-Hijiory ajferted. 9 then fVrlters^ thereby to evidence to the world that the main poftulata or fuppofitions of Chriftian Religion were granted by their own moft admired men : and that Chriftianity did not rafe out, but only build upon thole common foundations y which ^vere entertained by all who had any name for reafon. Though this, I fay, were the happy effed: of this building SeH, 9. . err ours on common truths to all that had the advantage of J)/- vine Revelation to dilcern the one from the other \ yet as to ethers who were dejfitnte of it , they were liable to this two- fold great inconvenience by it. Firft, for the fake of the appa- rent rottennefs of the SuperftruBures^ to queftion thefoundnefs of the foundations on which they flood. And this I doubt not w^as the cafe of many confiderative heathens. ^ who oblcrving that monftrom and unreafonable way of worfl^ip obtaining among the heathen^ and not being able by Xhtftrength of their own reafon^ through the want of divine revelation ^ to deduce any certain inflituted worfhip^ they were (hrewdly tempted to renounce thole principles^ when they could not but abhor the conclufions drawn from them ; for there is nothing more ufual than for men who exceedingly deteft Ibme abfurd confequence they fee may be drawn from a principle luppoled, to rejed: the principle it felf for the fake of that confequence^ which it may be doth not necefarily follow from it, but through the fhortnefs of their own reafon do^h appear to them to do fb. Thus when the intelligent heathen did apparently fee that from the princi^ pies of the Being of God^ and the Immortality of fouls ^ did flow all thole unnatural ^nd inhumane Sacrifices y all thole abfurd ^nd ridiculous Rites , all thofe execrable and profane Myfteries^ out of a loathing the immoralities and impieties which attended thefe, they were brought to queftion the very truth and certain- ty o( thoft principles which were capable of being thus abufed. And therefore I am very prone to fufpeB the apology ufual- Se[i. 10. ly made for Trotagorasy DiagoraSy and fuch others of them who were accounted Atheiftsy to be more favourable than true^ viz. ■ that they only rejedled thofe heathen DeitieSy and not the belief of the Divine nature, I fhould think this account of their reputed Atheifm rationaly were it any ways evident that they did build their belief of a Divine nature, upon any other grounds than fuch as were common to them with thole whofe worfloip they fo much derided. And therefore when the Heathens accufed C the lo Orighes Sacra: Book I. the Chrifiians of Atheifm , I have full and clear evidence that no more could be meant thereby than the rejeBion of their way of worjhip , becaufe I have Cufficknt Jjfurance from them that they did believe in a Divine nature^ and an injiituted Re- hgion moft fuitable to the moft common received notions of God , which they owned in oppofition to all heathen worjhip. Which I find not in the leaft pretended to by any of the fore- mentioned /^fr/awi, nor any thing of any different way of Reli- gion affcrted, but only a deftru^ion of that in «/^ among them. Secf, 1 1 . And although the cafe of Anaxagoroi Clazomenim^ and the reft of the lonick PhilofopherSy might feem very different from Diagoras^ Theodoruf , and thofe beforementioned , becaule al- though they denied the gods in vulgar repute to be fuch as they were thought to be (as Anaxagoras call'd the Sun ^v<^e^v Mtiv. avi a mere globe of fire ^ for which he was condemned at A- thens to banhhmcnt, and fined five talents ; yet the learned DeiMlar.c.j. Vojfim puts in this Plea in his behalf, That he was one that averted the creation of the world to flow from an eternal mind:) although therefore, I fay, the cafe of the lonick Vhilofophers may feem far different from the others^ becaufe of their affer- ting the produBion of the world ( which from Thales Milejius was conveyed by Anaximander and Anaximenes to Anaxago- ras ) yet to one that throughly conftders what they underjiood by their eternal mind^ they may be Iboner cleared from the im- put At ion of Atheifm, than Irreligion. Which two certainly ought in this cale to be dijlinguifhed^ for it is ycvypoffible for men, meeting with fuch i«/«fo"^^/^ difficulties about the cafu- al concourfe of Atoms for the produSlion of the world , or the eternal exi/tence of matter^ to aflert fbmc eternal mind^ as the firfi caufe of thefc things , which yet they may imbrace only as an hypotheps in Philofophy to folve the phenomena of nature with, but yet not to make this eternal mind the objeB of adoration. And fo their aferting a Deity was only on the fame account as the Tragedians ufed to bring in their 0sof il^^i ^Myom^y when their Tables were brought to fuch an i^ue^ ^nd perplexed with fo ma- ny difficulties that they faw no way to clear them again, but to make fome God come down upon the Stage to folve the diffi- culties they were engaged in ; or, as Seneca faith of many great Families when they had run up their Genealogies fo high that they could go no further, they then fetched their pedegree frona Chap. I. The Truth of Scripture- Hiflory ajferted. ir from the Gods : So when thefe Pbilofiphers faw fuch incongru- ities in alfcrting an infinite and eternal feries of matter ^ they might by this be brought to acknowledge fome aciive principle which produced the world, though they were far enough from giving any religious worflnp to that eternal mind, ■ Thus even Epicurus and his Followers w^ould not [lick to af- Seel. 12. lert the being of a God^ fo they might but circumfcribe him within the heavens^ and let him have nothing to do with things that were done on earth. And how uncertain the moll dogma- tical of them all were, as to their opinions concerning the be^ ing and 7iature of their gods , doth fully appear from the large difcourfes of Tully upon that fubjed : where is fully manifejled thtk variety o( opinions znd mutual repugnancies, thdv fe If -con- traditions and inconjiancy in their own ajfertions ; which hath made me fbmewhat inclinable to think that the reafon why ma- ny of them did to the world own a Deitjiy was, That they might not be Martyrs for Atheifm : Which Tully likewife r,e nat. Deoy. leems to acknowledge, when fpeaking of tht punifhment of Pro- 1. 1. c.6}, t agorae, for that Speech of his; De diis neque ut fint, neque ut non fintj habeo dicer e. Ex quo equidem exifiimo tardiores ad banc fententiam profitendam multos effe faBos, quippe cumposnam ne dubitatio quidem effugere potuifet. So that for all the verbal afferting of a Deity among them, we have no certain evidence of their firm belief of it, and much lc(s of any worfhip andy^r- vice they owed unto it. And though, it may be, could not totally excufs the notions of a Deity out of their minds, partly through that natural fenfe which is engraven on the fouls of mtn ; partly, as being unable to folve the difficulties of nature, without a Deity \ yet the obferving the notorious vanities of Heathen worfhip , might make them look upon it as a mere Thilofophical [peculation, and not any thing that had an influence upon tht government of mens lives : For, as in nature, t\\^ ob- ferving the great mixture offalfhood and truth made the Acade- micks deny any certain xe/TMe/o;/, or rule of judging truth -, and the Scepticks take away all certain ajfent j fo the lame confe- quence was unavoidable here , upon the lame principle ; and that made even Flato himlelf fo ambiguous and uncertain in his difcourfes of a Deity, fometimes making him an eternal mind, Ibmetimes aflerting the whole JVorld, Sun, Moon^ Stars, Earthy Souls and all, to be Gods, and even thofe that were worshipped C 2 - among IX Gr/g/nes Sacra : Book I. among the heathens^ as 7'ully tells us out of his Timam and de Legibiis ; which as Vdleius the Epicurean there fpeaks, Et per . fe funt falfa & fibi invicem repugnantia. This is the firft inconve- nience following the mixture of truth and faljhood^for the fake of the faljhood to que fl ion the truth it f elf it w/ujoyned with. Secf. 13. The other is as great which follows, when truth and faljhood are mixed , for the fake of the truth to embrace the faljhood. Which is a mifiake as common as the other ; becaufe men are apt to think that things fo vaftly different as truth and faljhood , could never ^/^-^i, or be incorporate together ; therefore when they are certain they have fomc truths they conclude no falf- hood to be joyned with it. And this I fuppofe to have been the cafe of the more credulous and vulgar Heathen^ as the other was of the Philofophers ; for they, finding mankind to agree in this, not only that there is a God^ but that he muft be worfhipp'dy did without fcruple make ufe of the way of worjhip among them, as knowing there mufl htfome^ and they were ignorant of any elfe. And from hence they grew to be as confident be- iievers of all thoib fables and traditions on which their idola- try was founded , as of thofe firf^ principles and notions from which the neceffity ef divine worfhip did arife. And being thus habituated to the belief of thefe things , when truth it felf was divulged among them, they fuj^ecled it to be only a corrupt tion of fbme of their fables. This Celfm the Epicurean on all * occafions in his books againft the ChriJiianSy did fly to. Thus he idSxh tht building of the Tower of Babel ^ and the confufion of Tongues^ was taken from the fable of the Aloada? in Homer 1 ^pudorig-c. OdyJfes\ the flory of the Floud^ from Deucalion^ Taradife y Cejf.l.^.p.i']^, f^Q^ Alcinom hi6 Gardens , the burning of Sodom and Gomor- ^'^' rah, from the (lory of Phaeton. Which Origen well refutes^ from the far greater antiquity of thofe relations among the Jews^ than any among the Greeks : and therefore the corrupti- on of the tradition vjas inthemy and not the ye-rri. Which muft be our only way for finding out which was the original y and which the corrupt ion y by demonjirating the undoubted antiqui- ty of one beyond the other , whereby we mufl do as Jrchimedes did by the Crown of Hiero, find out the t\zCi proportions of truth and falfhcod wiiich lay in all thofe heathen fables. Se^. 14. ^^"<^ ^h^s ^^^^ ^^2^s to the third account , Why truth is ^o hardly difcerned from ^rr^Kr, even by thofe who fearch after it, which Chap. I. T'he Truth of Scripture Hiflory ajferted, 13 which is the gnat obfcurity of the Hifiory of Ancient Times ^ which (hould decide the Controverfte. For there being an univerfal agreement in fome common principles^ and a frequent refemblance in particular traditions^ we muft of neceffity, for the clearing the truth from its corruption^ have recourfe to , ancient hifiory^ to fee if thereby we can find out where the Original tradition was bed prefervcd, by what means it came to be corrupted^ and whereby we may difiingui/b thofe corrup- tions from the Truths to which they are annexed : Which is the defign and fubjeB of our future difcourfe, viz. to demonjlrate that there w^zs a certain original and general tradition preserved in the world concerning th? ddeji Ages of the world ; that this tradition wm gradually corrupted among the Heathens ; that not^ withfianding this corruption there were fufficient remainders of it to evidence its true original ; that the full account of this tradi- tion u alone pre ferved in thofe books we call the Scriptures : That where any other hifiory feems to crofs the report contained in them, we have fuffcient ground to quefiion their credibility \ and that there is fuffcient evidence to clear the undoubted certainty of that hiftory which ii contained in the Sacred Records of Scrip- ture. Wherein wc (hall obferve the lame method which Thales took in taking the height of the Pyramids, by meafu- ring the length of their fhadow ; fb fhall we the height and antiquity of truth from the extent of the fabulom corruptions of it. Which will be a work of fo much the greater difficulty ^ becaufe the truth we purfue after takes covert in fo great an- tiquity, and we muft be forced to follow its mo^ flying foot- ftepf through the dark ^r\d fiady paths of ancient hiftory: For though hiftory be frequently called the Light of Truth, and the Herald of Times, yet that light is fo faint and dim^ efpecially in Heathen Nations, as not to ferve to difcover thQ face of Truth from her counterfeit, Errour ^ and that Herald fo little skill' d, as not to be able to tell us which is of the Elder houfe. The reafon is, though Truth be always o^ greater Antiquity, yet Errour may have the more wrinkled face, by which it often im- pofeth on fuch who guefs antiquity by deformity, and think no- thing io old as that which can give the lead accownt of its owp dge. This is evidently the cafe of thofe who make the pretence Q^ancient hiftory a plea/^r Infidelity ,zn<\ think no argument more pkufibk to impugn the certainty o( Divine Revelation mth, than th< le i^ Origines Sacra : Book I. the fcerning repugnancy of fbme pretended hijiorles with the ac- count oi ancient time reported in the Bible. Which being ^ pre- text fo unworthy^ and defigncd for fo ill an end, and lo fre- quently made ufe of , by fuch who account Infidelity a piece of antiquity as well as reafon^ it may be worth our while to (liew, That it is no more liable to be baffled with reafon^ than • to be confuted by aiitiquity, Sech 15. I^^ order therefore to the removing of this ftumbling-block in our way, I [h^\\firfi evince, that there ii no certain credibility in any of thofe ancient hiffories which feem to contradiB the Scrip- tures^ nor any ground of reafon why we fhould affent to them, when they differ from the Bible : and then prove, that all thofe undoubted charathrs of a rnofi certain and authentick hiftory are legible in thofe records contained in Scripture. Whereby we (hall not only fliew the unreafonablenefs of infidelity y but the ratio- , nal evidence which our faith doth ftand on as to thefe things. I (hall demonjlrate the firfi of thefe, viz. that there is no ground of affent to any ancient hifiories which give an account of things different from the Scriptures^ from thefe arguments ; The ap- parent defeBy weaknefs and infufficiency of them as to the giving an account of elder times ; The monflrous confufion^ ambiguity and uncertainty of them in the account which they give ; The evident partiality of them to them(elves, and inconfjftency with each other, I begin with the firft of thele , the defe5i and in- fufficiency of them to give in fuch an account of elder times as iiiay amount to certain credibility ; which, if cleared, will of it felf be fufficient to manifeft i\\t incompetency of thofe records^ as to the laying any foundation for any firm affent to be given to them. Now this defect and infufficiency of thofe hiftories is cither move general ^ which lies in common to them all, or fuch as may be obferved in a particular confederation of the /;/- J^ories of thofe fcveral Nations which have pretended higheft to antiquity. Sect. 1 6. The general defed is , the want of timely records to preferve their hiftories in. For it is moft evident, that the trucft hifto- ry in the world is liable to various corruptions through length of time , if there be no certain way of pre(erving it entire. And that, through the frailty of memory in thofe who had integrity to preferve it, through the gradual increafe of barbarifm and ig- norancey where there are no ways of inftru^Hon^ and through the chap. I. The Truth of Scripture-Hijlory ajferted, if the fukilty of fuch whofe intereft it may be to corrupt and al- ter that tradition. If we find fuch infinite variety and diffe- rence oimen, as to the hiftories of their own timesy whentlicy have all pojjible means to be acquainted with the truth of them ; what account can we imagine can be given by thofe who had no certain way of preferring to pofterity the moft authentick relation of former Ages ? Efpecially , it being moft evident, that where any certain way of preferving tradition is wanting, a People muft loon degenerate into the gvtdX^^ ftupidity and barbarifm^ becaufe all will be taken up in minding their own petty concerns y and no encouragement at all given to fuch/?«^- lick fpirits , who would mind the credit of the whole Nation. For what was there for fuch to employ thcmfelves upon, or fpend their time in , when they had no other kind of learn^ ing among them , but fbme general traditio?is conveyed from father to fon^ which might be learned by fuch who follovv^ed nothing but domeftick empkyments ? So that the fons of Noahy after their levcral difperfions and plantations of feveral Coun- tries , did gradually degenerate into ignorance and barbarifm : for, upon their firft fetling in any Countrey^ they found it em- ployment fufficient to cultivate the Land^ and fit themfelves ha- bitations to live in , and to provide themfelves of necejjities for their mutual comfort and fubjijlence, Befides this, they were of- ten put to removes from outplace to another ^ where they could not conveniently refide (which Thncydides fpeaks much of as to the ancient ftate of Greece) and it was a great while before they came to imbody themiy ves together in Towns and Cities, and from thence to fpreaa into Provinces , and to fettle the bounds and extents of their Territories. Tht firfl age, after the plantation of a Countrey being thus jj^^;?^, the next faw it necef- fary to fall clofe to the work of husbandry , not only to get fome- thing out of the earth for their fubfijience\ but when by their diligence they had fo far improved the ground , that they had not only enough for themfelves , but to J}>are to others , they then found out a way for commerce one with another by ex- change. This way of traffick made them begin to raife their hopes higher, of enriching themfelves ; which when feme of them had done, they bring tht poorer under i\\d[v power ^ and reign as Lords over them ; thefe rich, with their dependants^ ftrive to outvye each other , whence came wars and mutual coritentionsy i6 Orighes Sacra : Book I. xententions^ till they who got the better over their adverfaries^ took ftill greater authority into their hands ( thence at frfi every City almoft, and adjacent Territory^ had a King over it ) which by conflicting with each otbery at laft brought feveral Cities and Territories under the power of (j»e particular per- fbn, who thereby came to reign zsfole Monarch over all with- in his dominions, ScFt. 17. For although there be fome reafon to think that the Lead- ers of feveral Colonies had at fir ft fuperiority over all that went with them ; yet there being evidence in few Nations of any continued fiiccejfton of Afonarchs from the pofterity of Noah^ and fo great evidence of fo many petty royalties almoft in every City ( as we read of fuch multitudes oi King's in the fmall ter- ritory of Canaan^ when Jojhm conquered it,) this makes it at leaft probable to me, that after the death of the firft Leader^ by reafon of their poverty and difperfednef of habitations^ they did not incorporate generally into a«y Civil government under one head, but did rile by degrees in the manner before fet down ; but yet fo, that in the petty divifions fome prerogative might be given to him who derived his pedigree the near eft from the firft Founder 0^ that plantation ; which in aW probability is the meaning of Tlmcydides, who tells us when the riches of Greece began to increafe, and their power improved, Tyrannits were Lib. I. hiji. p. credcd in moft Cities {T^fiTi^y 0 rcmv ^ ptiiftf ytep^ mcrexm 10. Ed. Port. ^ttciKkitu^ for before that time Kingdoms with honours limited were hereditary ) for lb the Scholiaft explains it, pmrtiw ^tm- then being the ft ate and cafe of itfoft Nations in th^ firft ages after their /?/^»/^4/-/^;?, -there was no likelihood at all of any great improvement in knowledge among them ; nay fo far from it, that for the firft ageSy wherein they confiiBed with poverty and neceftity^ there was a necejfary decay among them, of what know- ledge had been conveyed to them \ becaufe their necejfities kept them in continual employment ; and after that they conquered them, they began to conquer each other^ that 'till fuch time as they were fettled in peace under eftablifhed Common-wealths^ there was no leifure^ nor opportunity for any Arts and Sciences to flourifio^ without which all certain hiftories of their own for- mer ftate muft vanipj and dwindle into fome fabulom ftories. And fo we find they did in moft Nations^ which thence arc able Chap. I. Tlye Truth of Scripture-Hijiory ajferted, 1 7 able to give no other account of themfelveSy but that they fprung out of the earth where they lived j from which opinion the Athenians ufed to wear of old their ^^/ie« grajhoppers^ as 7^«- cydides relates. What account can we then expeB of ancient times from fuch Nations which were fb defeBive in preferving their own Originals ? Now this defeBivenefs of giving te(timony of ^;?(r/>«/' ?/;»^j- ^^,^, i g. by thefe Nations^ will further j^/^f^r by thele riTf? confederati- ons : Fir ft, ^/2^ TFJ^i /"/^^r^ are for communicating knowledge to pofterity. Secondly, How long it wa^ en thefe Nations came to be Makers of any way of certain communicating their concept i- ens to their Succejfors, Tliree general ways there are whereby knowledge may be propagated from one to another ; by re- prefentative fymbols^ by fpeech^ and by letters. The firfl of thefe was moft common in thofe elder times^ for which purpofe Cle- mens Alexandrine produceth the tefiimony of an ancient Gram-' marian^ Dionyfim Thrax m his Expofition of the fymbol of the wheels: \(rl\ua.tve Cadmus comes from the Hebrew Dip, and may relate as an appellative either to his dignity^ as Junins in his Academia conjedures, or more probably to his Country, the Eaft, v;hich is frequently call'd D"tp in Scripture, Some have conjedured further, that his proper name was ;;y, upon what reafon I know not, unlefs from hence, that thence by a duplication of the word, came the Greek "ii^^^y©-, who ieems to have been no other than Cadmm, as will appear by compa- ring their ftories together. Only one was the name his memory was prelerved by at Athens, where the Cadmeans inhabited, as appears by the Gephyr^i, whom Herodotus tells us were Phxni- cians that came with Cadmus, ( and others fanfie the Academia uift. l. j. there was originally called Cadmea ) and the name Cadmus was preferved chiefly among the Boeotians in memory of the Coun- try whence he came: It being likely to. be impofed by them upon his firfl: landing in the Country, as many learned perfons conceive the ?2ame of an Hebrew was given to Abraham by the Canaanites upon his paffing over the River Euphrates. On this account then it ftands to realbn, that the name which was gi- ' v^n him as d.ftr anger, fliould be longed preferved in the place where it was firft impofed. Or if we take Dip in the other fence, as it imports antiquity -, fo there is flill a higher proba- bility of the affinity of the names of Cadmus and Ogyg^s ; for this is certain, that the Greeks had no higher name for a mat- ter of Antiquity, than to call it '^yCy^oy, as the SchoUuji on He- fiod,Hefychiu6, Suidas, Eujiathiu6 on Dionyfius, and many others obferve. And which yet advanceth the probability higher, LuBatius or LaBantius the Scholiafi on Statius, tells us, the other Greeks had this from the Thebanes ; for, faith-he, Thebani in rheb. 1. 1. res antiquum Ogygias nominabant. Bat that which puts \t almoft D 2 be} end 20 drigines Sacra : Book I. beyond meer probability^ is, that Varro, fefius, Faufamoi, Jpollo- ?jiHS,iy£fchjilHS,^nd others rmk^ Ogyges the Founder of the Bceo- tian Ihebes^ which were thence called Ogygi^ j and Straho and Stephams -me} mhiav^fuvthcv fay, that the whole Country ofBceo- tia was called Ogygia \ now all that mention the Story of Cad- WHS, attribute to him the founding of the BosotianThehes. And withall it is obfervable, that in the Vatican Appendix of the Cent. 4. Prov. Greek Proverbs J we read Cadmus called Ogyges ; £iy!,y4cL ka)^ ^ ifttTnc-^v. Meurfius indeed would have it corred^ed, Kjt'cT^y r De Regno u4tt, '^>J>'k, as it is read in Suidas ; but by the favour of fo learned L/i^.2, e. 5. 2i many it feems more probable that Suidas (hould be corrected by that, he bringing no other evidence of any fuch p@r(bn as Cadmus a Son of C^^jv^^i,but only that reading in Suidas \ where- as we have difcovered many probable grounds to make them both the fame. That which I would new infer from hence is, the utter impojfibility of the Greeks giving us any certain ac- count of ancient times ^ when a thing lb modern in comparilbn as Cadmus his coming into Greece y is thought by them a mat- ter of fo great antiquity ^ that when they would defcribe a thing very ancient, they defcribed it by the name of Ogyges^ who was the fame with Cadmus. Now Cadmus his coming into Greece, is generally, by Hiftorians, placed about the time of Jo/hua, whence fomc ( I will not fay how happily ) have conie(ftured, that Cadmus ^nd his company were Ibme of the Canaanites who fled from Jojhua, as others are fuppofed to have done into A" frica, if Procopius his pillar hath ftrength enough to bear fuch a conjeB'ure, But there is too great a confufton about the time of Cadmus his arrival in Greece, to affirm any thing with any great certainty about it. Yet thofc who difagree from that former Computation, place De idti 1. 1. it yet lower. Vojjins makes Agenor, Cadmus his Father, co-tem- c- 13- porary with the latter end ofMofes, or the beginning of J^T^wj; and fb Cadmus his time muft fall fomewhat after. Jac, Captl- lus placet h Cadmus in the third year of OthonieL Pari us the Authour of the Greek Chronic le^ in the Marmora Arundelliana makes his coming to Greece to be in the time of He//en the fbn of Deucalion-, which Capellus fixeth on the 73. ofMofes, A.M. 2995. But Mr. Selden conceives it Ibmewhat lower: and fo it muft be, if we follow Clemens Ale^andrinuSyV/ho placeth it in Chap, I. 'The Truth of Scripture Hiflory affcrted] 2 f in the time of Lynceus King of the Argives^ which he faith was strom. i, iK A;(^'tm v-^esv Mft>efSA, in the eleventh Generation after Aio- fes^ which will fall about the time of Samuel: But though it ihould be fo late^ it would be no wonder it fhould be reckoned a matter of {0 great antiquity among the Grecians ) for the eldeft Records they have of any King at Athens^ begin at the time of MofeSy whofe co-temporary Cecrops is generally thought to be \ for at his time it is the Tarian Chronicle begins. Now that the Grecians did receive their very letters from the Phoenicians by Cadmus^ is commonly acknowledged by the mofl: learned of the Greeks themfelves, as appears by the ingenuous confejjim of Herodotus^ Philofiratus^ Criti/u in Athenms^ Zenodotus in La- ertiusy Timon fhliafius in Sixtus Empiricus^ and majiy others : fo that it were to no purpofe to offer to prove that, which they who arrogate fo much to themfelves ^ do fo freely acknowledge. Which yet hath been done to very good purpofe by Jofepb ^ot. in EHfb. Scaliger and Bochartus^ and many others from th^ form of the c^^^". w>6i7. Letters^ the order and the names of them. It feems probable /^f^^o^^' '^' that at firft they might ufe the form of the Fhmician Letter Sy in which Herodotus tells us the three old Infcriptions wxre ex- tant ; and Diodorus tells us, that the brafs pot which Cadmus offered to.Minerva Lyndia, had an Infcription on it in the ?hos- nician Letters^ but afterwards the form of the Letters came by degrees to be changed ^ when for their greater expedition in writing they left the old way of writing towards the left hand, for the more natural and expedite way of writing towards the rights by which they exchanged thQ fetes odhtftrokes in feveral Letters, as is obferved by the fore-cited Learned Authors. Not that the old lonick Letters were nearer the Vhsenician^ and diftinft from the modern^ as Jof Ssaliger in his learned Dif- in Eufeb. «. courfe on the original of the Greek Letters conceives ; for the lo- ^^n- nick Letters were nothing elfe but the full Alphabet of twenty- four , with the additions o[ Palamedes^ and Simonides Cous ; as Hijl.'i 7. ca^.. Pliny tells us, -that all the Greeks confented in the ufe of the 57- lonick Letters \ but the old Attick Letters came nearer the Phoenician y bccaufe the Athenians ^ long after the Alphabet was increafed to 24. continued Hill in the ufe of the old 16, which were brought in by Cadmus, which mu(^ needs much al- ter the way of writing; for in the old Letters, they writ THHO2 for ©sej ; which made Pliny ^ with a great deal of learn- tng zz Origines Sacra : Book I. ing and truthy fay, that the old Greek Letters were the lame with the Roman. Thence the Greeks called their ancient Let- nj. Mauffacum ters "ArJiyJ, y^J.f/.fMf,Tn, as appears by Harpocration and Hefychius^ in Harpocr. not that they were lb much diftind from others, but becaule ctTfefr'J^ they did not admit of the addition of the other eight Letters^ Tm^l\[\Q. which difference of writing is in a great meafure the caufs of the different dialed between the Athenians and lonians proper- ly fo called. Se5l, 21. We fee then the very Letters of the Greeks were no elder than Cadmus ; and for any confiderable learning among them, it was not near lb old. Some affert indeed that Hiftory began from the time o^ Cadmus \ but it is by a miftake of him for a younger Cadmus , which was Cadmus Milefius f whom Tliny makes to be the firft Writer in Profe j but that he after attri- i^at. hi ft. 1 5. butes to Pherecydes Syrius^ and Hiftory to Cadmus Milefius : c. i5>. l.'j.c.s']. and therefore I think it far more probable, that it was Ibme writing of this latter Cadmus^ which was tranlcribed and epi- strQV9. 1. 6. tomized by Bion TroconefiuSy although Clemens Alexandrinus feems to attribute it to the Elder, We fee how unable then the Grecians were to give an account of elder times, that were guilty of fo much infancy and nonage^ as to begin to learn their Letters almoft in the noon-tide of the florid, and yet long after this to the time of the firft Olympiad all their relations are ac- ^ counted fabulous. A fair account then we are like to have from them of the firft antiquities of the World, who could not fpeak plain truth 'till the World was above three thoufand years old ; for fo it was when the Olympiads began. So true is the obfervation ofjufiin Martyr, ijiy ihKm ^oa q^ "Ohvyt.'mcLT>f« 5 tt* -r^ei 'uMroy aVm- by he doth evidently ajfert the greater Truth and Antiquity of Mofes his Hiftory^ when he proves the truth of Sanchoniathons from his confonancy with that. Two things more Porphyrie infifts on to manifeft his credi- SeB, 3. bility ; the one I fuppofe relates to what he reports concerning the Jews^ the other concerning the Phcenicians themlelves. For the firfi, that he made ufe of the Records of Jerom-baal the Prieft of the God leuo, or rather lao ; for the other, that he tied all the Records of the feveral Cities^ and the facred In- fcriptions in the Temples. Who that Jerom-baal was, is much difculTed among learned men^ the finding out of which, hath been thought to be the moft certain way to determine the age of Sanchoniathon, The learned Bochartm conceives him to be Geogr.sacr p.i. Gideon^ who in Scripture is called Jerub-baal^ which is of the ^- *• ^- 17- lame ftnce in tht Fhcenician language, only after their cufiom changing one b into my as in Ambubaj^ Sambuca^ &c. But ad- mitting the conjeBure of this learned perfon concerning Jerub- baaly yet I fee no neceffity of making Sanchoniathon and him co- temporary ; for I no where find any thing mentioned in Tor- phyrie implying that, but only that he made ufe of the Records of Jerub'baaly which he might very probably do at a confide- rable diftance of time from him, whether by thofe <^ixy^[jiAla, we mean the Annals written by him, or the Rec§rds concerning his a&:ions ; either of which might give Sanchoniathon confide- rable light into the hifiory either of the Ifraelites or Fhcenid" dvs. And it is fo much the more probable, becaufe prefent- ly after the death of Gideon, the Ifraelites worlhipped Baal-Judg. 8. 33. berith •, by which moft probably is meant the Idol of Berith or Berytm, the place where Sanchoniathon lived ; by which means the Berytians might come eafily acquainted with all the remarkable paflages of Jerub-bsal. But I cannot conceive how Sanchoniathon could be co- Secf, 4, temporary with Gideon, (which yet if he were, he falls 182 years ftiort of Mofes,) efpecially becaufe the building of Tyre ^ which that Authour mentions as an ancient thing (as hath been E obferved x6 Origines Sacra* : Book L Not. infra^m, obfervcd by Scaliger) is by our beft Chronologers placed about Gr^c. p. 40. the time of Gideon^ and about 65 years before the deftrtiBton 0^ Troy. I know Bochartm^ to avoid this argument, hath brought fome evidence of feveral places called Tyrus in Vhce- nicia^ from Scylax his Feriplus ; but noyie^ that there was any more than one Tyrus of any great repute for antiquity. Now Mti^. I. 8. this Tyrm Jofeplms makes but 240 years elder than Solomon^^ Temple^ and Juftin but one year elder than the deftrutiion of Troy, Neither can any account be given why Sidon fliould be Ceogr. 1. 16. fo much Celebrated by ancient PoetSy as 6'^r^^Av{jM,Qi)g }^ 'jo\V'Zs^y/uo>y, a very learned and inquifitive man ; but either he was not fb diligent to enquire after, or not fo happy to light on any certain records ; or if he did, he was not over-much a Lover of truths in delivering them to the World. How faith full he was in tranfcribing his Hifiory from his Records^ wc cannot be fufficient Judges of unlefs we had thofe books of Taautm^ and thtfacred Infcripticns^ and the Records of Cities^ which he pretends to take his Hiftory from, to compare them together. But by what remains of his Hiftory y which is only the firft book concerning thzVhosnician Theology ex- tant in Eufebius, we have little reafon to believe his Hiftory of the World and eldeft times^ without further proof th^n he gives of it, there being fb much obfcurity and confufton in it, when he makes a Chaos to be the firft beginning of all things, and the Gods to come after, makes t\\t ilviix^^v and ymvQ- the Son ofchry- for or Vulcan, and again the man born of earth to be feveral generations after To^v(9- made two of the number of the Gods^ but the reft of the names^thty accord- ing to their feveral Se^s took a liberty of altering, .according to their feveral fancies. This is far more probable to me, than that either Hefiod's ^o^pia, fliould be the ground of them; or the opinion of a late German Divine, who conceives that Philo 'joh Vrftnuf Byblim did in imitation of the Gmftwks, form this holy ftory of Ex:rc.},fe£f.i. ^he Thanician Theology. For although I am far from believing "what Kircher fomewhcre tells us, that he had once got a fight of Sancboniatho?rs Original Hiftory (it being not the firft thing that 'learnsdman hath been deceived in,) yet I fee i\o groimd of fo Chap. 1. ithe Truth ef Scripture- Hiflory affertecL 29 (b much pcevijhnefs, as becaufe this Hiftory pretends to fo much antiquity^ we fnouid therefore prefently condemn it as a figment of the Tranflator of it. For had it been ^o^ the Antagomfts of Vorphyriey Methodm^ /jpoJlinaris , but efpecially Eujebius , {o well verfed in antiquities^ would have found out fo great a c^f jr.- Although I inuft confefs they were oft-times deceived mthpia fraudes \ but then it was when they made for the Chriftians^ and not againfi them, as this did. Rut befides a fabulous con- fuftm of things together, we have fome things delivered con- cerning their iSods^ which are both contrary to all natural no- tions of a Deity ^ and to thofe very common principles o{ huma- nity^ which ail acknowledge. As when xes^©-, or Saturn^ fuP- pedling his Son Sadidas^ deftroycd him with his own hands^ and warrd againft his Father VranuSy and afrer deftroyed him likewiie, and buried his Brothtv Jt las alive in the earth ; which being taken, as FbiloByhlius contends they ought to be, in the literal fence ^ are fuch incongruities to all notions of a divine nature y that it is the greateft wonder there (liould be any that fliould be- lieve there was any 6'(?i,and believe thefe WQvtGods together. But although there be lb many grols fables and inconfiften- Sect, 7. ties m this Phoenician Theology^ that are fo far from meriting helief in themfclves, that it were a fufficient forfeiture of rea- fbn to fay they were credible ; yet when we have a greater light in our hands oi divine revelation^ we may in this dungeon •find out many excellent remainders of the ancient tradition^ though miferably corrupted^ as concerning the Creation^ the Original of Idolatry ^ the inventionA)f Arts^ the foundation of Ci- ties, tfje ftory of Abraham, of which in their due place. That which of all leems the cleareft- in this Theology f\s the open own- ing the original of Idolatry to have been from the confecratiort lof fome ^mmmt per fons after their deaths who have found out -fome ufefull things for the world while they were living : which the fubtiller Greeks would not admit of, viz, that the perfons they worfliipped were once men^ which made them turn all into Allegories and Myftical fences to blind that Idolatry they were guilty of the better among the ignorant : which makes Fhih Byblius fb very angry with the Neoterick Grecians^ as he calls them, «? aV ^idoL^ixl^vai ^ U d^M? ri? TSe* ^^y uv^a^ W ^pttd Eitfck ti?^Mi}fifjLAi xj ipvaiifj:^ J)nyU^i 7^ i^ ^ceeiAi dLvdy^Ti : That with a ^'■**^ ^-i' ^-^^ great deal of force and firaining they tnrmd all the ftories of the ^' '' Gods 2j< 30 Origines Sacr^ : Book I. Gcds Into Allegories and thyfical difcowfes. Which is all the Ingeniiity that I know is to be found in this Vhxnkian Hjeology^ that therein we find a free acknowledgment of the beginning of the Heathen Idolatry : and therefore Sanchoniathgn was as far from advancing Porphyrie^s Religion, as he was in the leaft from overthrowing the credibility of Chrifiianity, SeU, 8. The next we come to then, are xhttyEgyptians \ 2i peopl-e fb unreafonably given to fables, that the wifeft aiTrion they did, -was to conceal their Religion, and the beft office their Gods had, was to hold their fingers- in their mouths, to command felence to all that came to worjhip them. But we defign not here any fet difcourfe concerning the vanity of the ^^gypti an Theology, which yet was Co monftroufly ridiculous, that even thofe who were over- run w^ith the height of Idolatry themfelves, did make it the objed of their fcorn and laughter. And certainly had we no other demonftration of the greatnefs of man s apofiafie .and degeneracy, the ^Aigyptian Theology would be an irrefragable- evidence of it : for who could but imagine a firange lowneis of fpirit in thofe who could fall down and worfliip the bafeft and moll contemptible of creatures ! Their T^w/?/^/ were the bcft Hieroglyphicks of themfelves, fair and goodly ftruBures without, but within fome deformed creature tn\hvme(\ for veneration. But though the ttSgyptians had loft their credit fo much as to mat- ters of Religion ; yet it may be luppofed, that they who were fo^ famed for wifdom and antiquity, fliould be able to give a/«//and exaB account of themfelves through all the ages of the world. And this they are (b far from being defeBive in, that if you will believe th-em, they will give you an account of themfelves many thoufands of years before ever the world was made, but the pecu- liar vanity of their C/^r^^^^/^^jy will be handled afterwards: That w^e now enquire into, is, what certain Records they had of their own antiquity, which might call for alTent from any unprejudi- ced mind ; whether there be any thing really anfwtring that loud and unparallell^d cry of antiquity zmong the and antiquity Hermes himifelf was , and of what accpjunt particularly thofe pillars were which hold up all the F.g:brick of Manetho his Dynafties, For//4f- gyptians might preferve with the greatcft veneration ; and whea jx Origines Sacr^ : Book I. when they were once fallen into that Jdelatry, of confecrating the memories of the firft Contrwuters to the good of mankind , they thought they had the greateft reafiya to adore his memory^ and fo by degrees attributed the invention of all ufefull things to him. For fb it is apparent they did, when Jamblichm tells Di Myfi. 1 1. ^ ^^-^^ ^£gyptians attributed all their books to Mercury, as the Father of them y becatife he was reputed the Father of wit and learnings they made all the off-fprings of their brains to bear their Fathers name. And this hath been the great reafon the world hath been fblong time impofed upon with varieties of hooks going under the mm^oi Hermes Trifmegifim. For he was not th^firfi of his kindy who in the early days of the Chrifti- m world obtruded upon the world that Cento or confufed mix- ture of the ChrifliaUy Platonick^ and tAigyptian docfriney which is extant ftill under the name of Hermes Trifmegiflm ; whole Vanity and falfhood hath been fufSciently deteded by learned men. There were long before his time extant feveral Mercu- rial books y as they were called, which none of the wifer Hea- thens did ever look on as any other than fables and impoftureSy as appears by Porphyrie's letter to Anebo the ^y£gyptian Pricft, and lamblichm his anfwer to it in his Book of the . C.2. f. I. tends to take all his relations from thc(tfacreJ infcriptions j and a^Eufehius tells us, tranflated the whole ^gjptian Hrfiory in- to Greek , beginning from their O/j , and continuing his Hi- ftory down near the time of Darius Codomamms , whom A- kxander conquered : for in Eufebius his Chronica mention is made £,'^':i Chap. 1. The Truth of Scripture- Htjlory averted. 35 made of Manetho his Hiftory, ending the 1 6th year of Jrta- xerxes Ochus^ which, faith Vojfms^ was in the fecond year of the 1 07 th Olympiad, This Manetho Sebennyta was High Vrieft DtHiji. Grae, of Heliopolls^ in the time of Ttolom^us Vhiladelphus^ at whofe ^- '• ^- ^'^* requefl: he writ his Hiftory, which he digefted into three Tomes y the firft containing the 11 Dynafties of the Gods and Heroes \ the fecond, S Dynafties -y the third 12, all containing, accor- ding to his fabulous computation , the fumm of 535 ^5 years. Thcfe Dynafties are yzt preferved^ being firft epitomized by Juli- ns Africanus^ from him tranfcribed by Eufebius in his Chroni- ca^ from Eufebius by Georgius Syncellus^ out of whom they arc produced by Jof Scaliger^ and may be feen both in Eufebius , and his Canones Ifagogici. Nov^ Manetho, as appears by ^?(/^^i«/, voucheth thisasthe ScB:, n. main teftimony of his credibility^ that he took his Hiftory^ ^^ gZ6V , (^ *r Kct\ciiihV(TlAjOV lit '^ 'S^f J^lethiKJa ili rlw iKKbjJly£gyptian Temples , by Agathodamon , the fecond Mercury , the Father of Tat. Cer- tainly this fabulous Authour could not in fewer words have more manifefted his own impoftures, nor blafted his own credit more than he hath done in thele ; which it is a wonder (b ma- ny learned men have taken fo little notice of, which have found frequent occafion to fpeak 0^ Manetho and his Dynafties. This I (hall make appear by fbme great improbabilities, and other plain impojftbilities which are couched in them. The improbabili- ties are, firft fuch pillars^ being in fuch a place as Seriad, and that place no more fpoken of either by himfelf , or by any 0- ther ^Aigyptians, nor any ufe made of thefe infcriptions by any other but hirafclf. As to this terra Seriadica where it fhould be , the very learned and inquifttive Jofeph Scaliger plainly gives out, and ingenuoufly profeifeth his ignorance. For in his notes m the fragments of Manetho in Eufebius^ when he comes F to 34 Origines Sacra : Book I. to that h 7?! >? 'ZneictJ'iKT) , he only faith, ^ta mhis ignotn Not. in gr. Eh- qiiavant ftudiofi. But Jjaac Vofftus , is his late Difcourfes , De fib' p-^o^- De ^^^^g yfimdi y cries 6jf«<5t, and confidently perfuades himfelf ^t.Tmmd.c. 10. ^j^g^ -^ j^ ^j^g j-^^^^ ^1^^ 5^/rj/;, mentioned, Judges 3.16. In- deed were there nothing elfe to be confidered but affinity of names^ it might well be the fame, but that □'•b'^DS, which we render xho- ft one-quarries^ fhould fignifie thefe pillars of Mercury^ is fomewhat hard to conceive. The Seventy render it, as himfelf obferves, 7a yKv:^a, by which they underftand graven Images: So the word is ufed 2 Chron, 33. 19. Deut, 7. 5. 7/2?. 10. 19. The vulgar Latin renders it, ad locum Idolorum^ which were the certain interpretation , if Chytr^m his conje- fture were true, that Eglon had lately fet up Idols there ; but if it be meant oi pillars , I cannot but approve o^ Junius his interpretation^ which I conceive bids faireft to be the genuine Jofli.4. 19,10, fence of tht place^ viz, that th^f^ ftones here, were the m ft ones ^'- pitched by Jofhua in Ci/^^/ after the Ifraelites pafled over J or dan \ and thQk ft ones are laid to be by Gilgal^ Judges 3. 19. So that notwithftanding this handlbme conjeBure^ we are as far to leek for the pillars of Mercury as ever we were, and may be fo to the world s end. Secondly^ the (landing of thele pillars during th^floud , which muft be fuppofed certainly to have fome lingular virtue in them to refift fuch a torrent of waters^ which overthrew the ftrongeft built houles, and moll compared Cities j the plain impoftibilities are firft^ that Mane- tho Ihould tranlcribc his Dynafties from the beginning of the Hiftory of ^Aigypt^ to almoft the time of Alexander ^ out offa^ cred Infer ipt ions of Thoytb^ who lived in the beginning of the very firft Dynafty according to his own computation. Sure this Thoyth was an excellent Vrephety to write an Hiftory for above ^0000 years to come, as Manetho reckons it. Secondlyy it is as well ftill , that this Hiftory after the fioud ftiould be tran- fktcd into jkieroglyphick CharaBers; what kind of trandation is that ? we had thought kieroglyphicks had been reprefentati- ons of things y and not of founds and letters^ or words : How ' could this Hiftory have at firft been written in any tongue^ when it was in kieroglyphicks f Do hieroglyphicbs ipccik in le- veral la}2guages ^^nd are they capable of changing their tongues? But, thirdly y it is as good ftill, that the ficond Mercury or v^* gathodamon did tranflatc this Hiftory fo foon after the floud 1 into chap. X. The Truth of Scrtpturc-Htflory afferted, j j" into Greek : Was the Greek tengne ib much in requeft fo loon after the floudy that Xh^ ^i^gypian Hiftory for the fake of the Greeks muft be tranflated into their language f Nay, is it not evident from Herodotm and Diodorus^ that the Grecians were uend. 1 1. not permitted (b much as any commerce with the i^gyptianSy Dhd. I. c,6t. till the time of Tfammeticus ^ which fell out in the 26th Dy- \ nafty of Manethoy and about a Century after the beginning of the Olympiads.- We fee then how credible an Author Mane- tho is , and what truth there is like to be in the account of ancient times given by the /Nahor, and to Zaradchath the lerfian a^ the Authour of it., who is conceived to be the fame with Zoroafter^ who in all probability is the fame with the ZertQoft of the Ferfees^ a Sedt of the ancient Perftans living now among the Banyans in the Indies, Thefe give a more full and exaft ac- count concerning the original., birth., education., and enthufiafmSy or revelations of their Zertoofi., than any we meet with in any Greek Hijiorians ; three books they tell us of which Zertooft received by Revelation, or rather one book, confiding of three feveral traBs., whereof the firft was concerning judicial Afiro- logy., which they call Aftoodeger j the fecond concerning t hy- fick^ or the knowledge of iiatural things \ the third was called Zertooft., from the bringer of it, containing their religious rites \ the firft was committed to thtjefopps, ov Magi's, the fecond to Vhyficians^ the third to the Darooes or Church-men., wherein arc contained the feveral precepts of their Law ; we have Ukewife the rites and cuftoms of thefe i erfees in their worfliip of fire, with many other particular rites of theirs publiQied fbme time fince by one Mr. Lord, who was a long time reftdent among them at Siirrat \ by which we may not only undcrftand much of the Religion of the ancient VerftanSy but if I miftake not, fomewhat of the Zabii too. My rea- sons are, bccaufe tlic ancient Zaradcha or Zoroafter is by Said Batricides made the Authour of the Zabii., as we have ^tm ilready, who was undoubtedly the founder of the Perfian wor- fhipy ai Chap. 3. the Truth of Scripture- Hiflory ajferted, 41 fhif^ or rather a promoter of it among the Verfians ; For Ammhnm Marcellinm tells us that he was inftruded in the h//?. /. ij. rites of the Chaldeans^ which he added to the Ferftan rites ; befides, their agreement in the chief point 0^ Idolatry^ the wor^ /hip of the SMn^ and conlequeruly the ttv^j^Ia or Symbol of the Sun, the eternal fire^ is evident j which as far as we can learn, was the great and moft early Idolatry of the Eaftcrn Coun- tries ; and further w^c find God in Leviticus 26. ;o. threat- ning to deftroy their DH^^QH their Images of the Sun^ fome render it \ but moft probably by that word is meant the Twe^u^lcL, the hearths where they kept their perpetual fire, for thofe are D^3Qn from nOH, which is uied both for the Sun r: Fof idol. and Fire, Now hence it appears that this Idolatry was in ufe ^- ^' ^- 9- among the Nations about Paleftine -, elfe there had been no need of fo fevere a threatning again ft it, and therefore moft probably the rites of the Zabii ( which muft help us to ex- plain the reafons of (bme particular pofitive precepts in the Levitical Law relating to Idolatry ) are the fame with the rites of the Chaldeans and PerJianSy who all agreed in this worftiip .of the Sun and Fire ; which may be yet more probable from - what Maimonides (aith of them , that Gens Zah^a erat gens - quis implevit totum orhem ; it could not be then any obfcurc Nation, but fuch as had the hrg^d fpread in ihtEaftern Coun- tries^ which could be no other than the ancient Chaldeans^ from whom the Verfians derived their worftiip. It may not feem altogether improbable that Balaam the famous South- fayer was one of thefe Zabii^ efpecially if according to Salma- ftm]\\s judgment -they inh'dh'itQd Mefopot ami a j for Balaam's Country ieems to be there ; for it is laid, Numb. 21. 5. that he dwelt in Vethor by the river ^ i. e. (aith the Chaldee Paraphrafi^ in Peor of Syria by Euphrates^ which in Scripture is called the river y Efa. 8.7. But from this great obfcurity as to the hifiory of fo ancient and lb large a people as thefe Zabii are fuppofed to be, w^e have a further evidence to our purpofe of the de- fedivenefs and infufticiency of the Eaftern Hiftories as to the giving any full account of thcmfelves and their own origi- nal. We are told indeed by Ibme, that Nabonafer did burn and SeH. 4. deftroy all the ancient Records of the Chaldeans which they had diligently preferved amongft them before, on purpofe to G raife ^%; Origines Sacred : Book P: raife the greater reputation to himfelf, and blot out the me^ mory of his ufurpation^ by burning the Records of all their own ancient Kings, Which is a conceit I fuppofe hath no other ground than that the famous ^ra fb much celebrated by A- ftronomers and others, did bear .the name of Nabunaffer. Vv^hich (if we iliould be fo greedy of all empty conje^uns which tend to our purpofe as to take them for truths) would be a very ftrong evidence of the faljhood and vanity of the Chaldeans in their great pretences to antiquity. But as the cafe ftands in reference to their Hiftory, we find more evidence from Scrip^^ ture to aflert their jujl antiquity^ than ever they are able to produce out of any undoubted records of their own. Which yet hath been endeavoured by an Authour both of Ibme cre- dit and antiquity^ the true Berofm, not the counterfeit of An- nius^ whoie vizard w^e (hall have occafwn to /?//// off afterwards. This Berofus w^as, as Jofephwj and Tattanm aflure us, a Priefi of G. App. l. I. Belus and a Babylonian born , but afterwards flourifhed in the c, Gr^cQs. jji^ ^j: q^^ ^^j ^^ ^j^^ j^^jj. ^j,^ brought the Chaldean Ajirology in requefi among the Greeks ; in honour to whole name and m^ . rnory^ the Athenians (who were never backw^ard in applauding. thoie who brought them the greateft neivs^ efpecially iffuita- ble to their former fuperfiition) ereBed aftatue for him with a gilded tongue. A- good emblem of his Hifivry, which made a fair m-\d fpeciom Jhew, but was not that within, which it pre- tended to be: efpecially where he pretends to give an account of the moft ancient times , and reckons \\^ his two Dynafiies before the time of Belus : but of them afterwards. It cannot he denied hut fome fragments of his hifiory^ which have been preferved- from ruine by the care and induftry of Jofephm, Ta- tianm^ Eufebius and others, have been very ufefull, not only for proving the truth of the hiftory of Scripture to the Heathens > but alfo f or. illuft rating fome pa f ages concerning the Babylonian append ad I. Empire : as making Nabopolajfer the Father of Nebucadonofor., deEmend,Temp. Q^ which ScaligerhdXh fullv fpoken in his notes upon his fragments. SeB, <; ^^^ t)e it from me to derogate any thing even from prophane hifloriesy where they do not enterfere with the facred Hiftory of Scripture \ and it is certainly the bed improvement of thefe to make them draw water to the Sanctuary ., and to ferve as fmaller Stars to. conduct us in our rvay, when we cannot enjoy the bfr- nelit . chap. 3. The Truth of Scripture- H/fcory ajferted, 43 nefit of that greater light of facred Hiftory, But that which I impeach thefe prophane hiftories of, is only an infufficiency as to that account of ancient times, wherein they are fo far from giving light to facred Records^ that the deftgn offetting of them up feems to be for cafiing a cloud upon them. Which may feem fbmewhat the more probable in that thofe monfirom ac- counts of the Egyptian and Chaldean Bynajiies did never pub- lickly appear in the world in the Greek Tongue, 'till the time that our [acred Records were tranflated into Greek at Alexan- dria, For 'till that time when this authentick hiftory of the world was drawn forth from its privacy and retirement, (being as it were kckt up before among the Ifraelites at Jud^a) into the public k notice of the world about the time of Ptolom^m Thiladelphm , thele vain pretenders to antiquity thought not themfelves ib much concerned to ftand up for the credit of their own Nations., For 'till that time the credulom world, not being acquainted with any certain report of the creation znd propagation of the world, was apt to [wallow any thing that was given [orth by thofe who were had in fo great efteem as the Chaldean and ttAigyptian Friefis were : Becaufe it was fuppofed that thoic perjons who were freed from other avoca- tions, had more leifare to inquire into thele things ; and be- caufe of their myfteriou6 hiding what they had from the vul- gar, were prefumed to have a great deal more than they had. But now when the Sun of right eou[ne[s w-as approaching this Horizon of the world, and in order to that the [acred Hifiory like the day-fiar was to give the world notice of it, by which the former Jhadows and mifts began to fly away, it concerned all thofe whole inter eft lay in the former ignorance of mankind, as much as they could to rai[e all their ignes [atui, and what- ever might tend to obfeure that approaching light, by invali- dating the credit of that which came to bejpeak its accep- tance. It is very ohfirvable to confider what gradations and ftepf Se^. 6, there were in the world to the appearance of that ^r^W /igi?/: which came down from heaven to dire£t us in our way thi- ther ; how the world not long before was awakened into a greater inquifitivenefs than ever before, how knowledge grew into repute, and what methods divine providence uled to give .the inquifitive world a Z"^/ of 7V«r^ at prefent to ftay their G 2 ftomachs^ 4^ Origines SacriC : Book I. ftomachsy it\d prepare them for that further difcovery of it afterwards. In order to this that Nation of the Jews which was ove the probability of it, by taking a more particular account of the time when the Scriptures were firft tranflated , arid the occa- fion might thereby be given to thele zAigyptians and Chalde- ans to produce their fabulous account into the view of the world. Whether the Scriptures had been ever before tranfla- ted into the Greek language, ( though it be alfertcd by fome ancient . Chap. 3. The Truth of Seripture-Hijlory ajferted. 45* ancient Writers of the Churchy ) is very queftionable, chiefly upon this account^ that a fufficient reafon cannot be affigned of undertaking a new tranflation at Alexandria if there had been any extant before. Efpecially if all thofe circumfiances of that tranjldtion be true which are commonly received and de- livered down to us with almoft an unanimom confint of the perfons who had greater advantages of l^nowing the certainty of fuch things, than we can have at this great difiance of time. And therefore certainly every petty conjecture of fbme modern^ though learned men, ought not to bear [way againft fb unanimous a tradition in a matter oi facl^ which cannot be capable of being proved but by the teftimony of former ages. And it is fomewhat ftrange that the fingle teftimony of one Hermippm in Diogenes Laertim ( whofe age and autho- ;>y^ Demetrii. rity is fomewhat doubtfull ) concerning only one particular ' referring to Bemetrim Vhalerem^ fliould be thought of force enough among perfons of judgment as well as learnings to in- fringe the credibility of the whole ftory delivered with fb much confent^ not only by Chrifiian, but Jewijh tVriters ; the teftimony of one of which ( every whit as confiderable as Hermippm ) viz. Ariftobulm Jud^m a Peripatetical Philofo- ^pud Eufeb. pher in an Epiftle to Ptolomy Philometor doth plainly aftert P^^^p- Evang. that which was fo much queftioned, concerning Demetrius ^- '3- Fhalereus, But whatever the truth of all the particular circumfiances SeB. 8. be, which I here enquire not after, nor the authority of that Arifteus from whom the ftory is received , nor whether this tranflation was made by Jews fent out of Jud^a^ or by Jews refiding at Alexandria \ it fufficeth for our purpofe that this tranflatim was made before either the Chaldean Dynafties of Berojiis^ or the ^Aigyptian of Manethoy were publiftied to the m)rld. In order to which it is necejfary to (hew in what time this tranflation was effected ; and herein that channel ■ -of tradition which conveys the truth of the thing in one certain courfe^ runs not with fo even a ftream concerning the exadt time of it ; all indeed agree that it was about the . time of Ptolom^us Philadelphus^ hut in what years of his reign^ is very dubious. Jofepb Scaliger who hath troubled the waters fo much concerning the particular circumfianc-'s of Jmmad. ad this tranflation. yet fully agrees that it was done in the time ^'"'"- ^'^J'^- ^ ^ of 'in- ..^6 Origines Sacr^e : Book I. of Ttolom^Ms Thilddelphm-j only he contends with Jfrkams that it fhould be done in the 13 id. Olympiad ^ which is in the 33 d. je^r of Ptolomaus FhiladdpBus ; but Eufebius and Jerom place it in the very beginning of his reign , Vv^hich I think is far more probable, and that in the time when Vtoloma- us Philadelphus reigned with his Father Ttolomaus Lagi : for fo it is moft certain he did for two years before his father's death. By which means the great difficulty of Scaliger concerning De- metrius Thaler eus is quite taken off ; for Hermippus fpeaks no- thing of D^/w^m'^j his being out of favour with PhiladelpJms -KScaliger. ih. during \\\s father s life^ but that upon hh father's deaths he was Theocrit. Schol jyamjhed by him, and dyed in his banijhment ; fo that Demetri- ^tnfn^l '16 ^^ might have the overfight of the Library at Alexandria^ and ;Eufeb.chr.'gr. he the main inflrument of promoting this tranjlation, and yet thofe things be after true which Hermippus fpeaks, viz. When Vtolomaus Lagi or Soter was now dead For it ftands not to reaibn that during his fathers life Philadelphus \\\ow\(\ difc over his difpleafure againft Demetrius , it being conceived upon the advice given to his father for preferring the Sons of Arfinoe to th^ Crown before the Son of Berenice, Mod likely there- fore it is that this tranflation might be begun by the means of Demetrius Phalereus in the time of Philadelphus his reigning with his father^ but, it may be, not finidied till after the death of Soter y when Philadelphus rdgn^d alone. And by this now we can perfectly reconcile that difference which is among the fathers concerning the time when this tranflation was made. For Irenaus attributes it to the time of Ptolom^us Lagi, Cle- mens Alexandrinus queftions whether in the time of Lagi or Philadelphus ; the reft of the Chorus carry it for Philadelphus ; but the words of AnatoHus in Eufebius caft it fully for both ; Hifl.Eccll. 7. for there, fpeaking of Arifiobulus ^ he faith, he was one of ■€' 2.6. the Seventy who interpreted the Scriptures to Ptolom^eus Phila- delphus and his Father ^ and dedicated his Commentaries upon the Law to both thofe Kings, Hac fane omnem jcrupulum exi- munt , faith Vojfms upon producing this teftiniony , this Dt Uijl. Crxc. puts it out of all doubt ; and to the fame purpofe fpeaks the /.I. cap. ri. learned Jefuite Petavius in his Notes on Epiphanius. ^^^ X °" Having thus far cleared the time when the tranflation of ^* the Scriptures into Greek was made , we (liall find our conje- tfure much ftrengthnedy by comparing this with the age of the fore- Ghap. 3 . The Truth of Scripture Hijlory ajferted. 47 fore-mentioned Hiftorians , Manetho and Berofits, Maneth we have already made appear to have lived in the time ofPto- lomms Philadelphus , and that, faith Vojfius^ after the death of Soter. It is evident from what remains of him in Enfebius his Chromca , that he not only flouri(hed in the time of Thikdel' pbus^ but writ his hifiory at the fpecial command of Pbiiadel- phus , as manifeftly appears by the remaining Epiftle of Ma- netho to him, ftili extant in Enfebius. This command of rhi- chr. Cr. p 6.- ladelphus might very probably be occafioned upon the view of that account , which the Holy Scriptures , being then tranfla- ted into Greek , did give of the world , and the propagation of mankind y upon which, we cannot imagine but fo inquifttive a perfon as Philadelphus was , would be very earned to have his curiofity fatisfied, as to what the -Egyptian Friefts (who had boafted Co much of antiquity ) could produce to confront with the Scriptures. Whereupon the task w^as undertaken by this Manetho , High-Prieft of Heliopolis^ w^hereby thole things which the ^yEgyptian Priefts had to that time kept fecret in their Ckijlers^ were now divulged and expofed to the judgment c£ the learned world -, but what fatisfaBion they were able to give i?iquifitive minds, as to the main ^A^^A^ov, or, matter en- quired after., may partly appear by what hath been laid of Manetho already , and by w^hat fhall be fpoken of his Dynafiies afterwards. But all this v;ill not perfuade Kircher-^ for, whatever Sea- liger-, nay, what il^j;2e/-/;o him felf faith to the contrary , he^ with the confidence and learning of a Jefuite , affirms , That this Manetho is elder than Alexander the great. For thefe are his W'ords., Frequens apud prifcos hifioricos Dynafiiarum lyEgyp- Oedi^, ^-^gyp^y tiacarum fit mentio , quarum tamen ahum Author em non habemus ^"^ * • ^y^f^g- 1 nift Manethonem Sebennytam, Sacerdotem ^t^gyptium^ quern ante ^' ^' temper a Alexandri , quicquid die at Scaliger , in tyEgypto floruijfe comperio. Certainly fome more than ordinary evidence may be - expecled after fo confident an affirmation ; but whatever that perfon be in other undertakings , he is as unhappy a perfon in Philology, as any that have pretended fo much acquaintance with it. One would think, he that had been twenty years, as he tells us himfelf, courting the z^gyptim Myfieries for com- paffing his Oedipus ^ iliould have found fome better arguments to prove an -^jf^rr/iJ^ of this nature, than merely th^teftimony of' 48 Origines Sacm : Book I. of Jofephus , the Hebrew book Juchafm , and fome Arab ck matters , not one of all which do mention the thing they are brought for, viz that Manetlio rvas elder than Alexander. All the bufinefs is, they quote him as an ancient writer \ but Vi'hat then ? The Author of the Book Juchafm was Abraham Zachuth J a Jew of Salamamha , who writ in the year of our' Lord 1505. and this Book was firft printed at Conftantinopky J 5)6. Might not this man then well mention Manet ho ^s an ancient Writer , if he fiourilhed above 1600 years before him, in the time of Ytolomaus Fhiladelphus ? And what if fome Arabick Writers mention him ? Are they of fo great antiquity and credit thcmfelves, that it is an evidence Mane- tho lived in Alexander'^ time to be praifed by them ? It would be well , if Kirch er J and other learned men, who think the world is grown to fb gvQ^t fiupidity , as to believe everything to be a jewel which is far fetched , w^ould firft affert and vin- dicate the antiquity and fidelity of their Arabick Authors , fuch as Gelaldimis. .'hevephi^ and many others, before they ex- ^di we (hould part with our more authentick Records of Hi- fiory for thole fabulous relations which they are fo full fraught v>^ithall. Were it here any part of my prefent bufinefs, it were an eafie matter fb to lay open the ignorance , falfity , and fabu- loufneji of thole Arabians whom that Author relies fb much upon, that he could not be freed from a defign to impofe upon the worlds who makes ufe of their tefiimony in matters of an- cient times without a Caveat. I know none fit to believe thele Arab'ck Writers as to thefe things ,• but thofe who have faith enough to conco^ the Rabbins in matter of Hifiory. Of whom c. celfum.l. 2. Origen faith, Wj/?* ju^ .^' 'uWicov ^ vZv (jlC^i )y Aite?/. Who ^ntjot. in Mar. jjj-^^ gg Grotius truly faith, peffimi hiftoria Magiflri ; nam ex ^^' '^^' qiio patria expulfi funt , omnis apud illos hiftoria crajfis erroribus & jabulis eft inquinata^ quibus & proinde nihil credendum eft^ Exercit.ad Ba. nifi aliunde teftes accederent. And, as if Cafaubon palleth this ron. 16. 5. 8. fharp, but due cenfure upon them, Rabbinis ubi de Lingua He- • braica agitur & voci6 alicujus proprietate , vel aliquo Talmudico inftituto^ meritoa i,hriftianis tribuinon parum ; ubi vero a ver- bis venitur ^d res^ aut ad bifteriamy vel rerurn antiquarum vete- ris popidi explicationem^ n ft falli & decipi voluwus, nihil admv- dum ejfe illis fidei habendum. Sexcentis argumentis hoc facile pro- harem ft id nunc agerem. And in reference to their ancient rites Chap. 3. The Truth of Scripture- Hijiory ajjerted, 4^ rites as well as hiftory^ Jofeph Scaliger hath given this verdiSl. De Emend. of them, Man if eft a eft Judaorum infcitia , qui cum ufu veterum '^^^"^' '■ ^• rituurriy etiam eomm cognitionem amifermty ut multa qu^ ad eo- rum facra & hiftoriam pertinent ^ longe melius nos teneamm quam ipfi. The lame which thefe very learned perfons fay of Rabbinical^ may with as much truth be faid of thefe Arabick Writers, in matters 0^ ancient hiftory ^ which I have here in- ferted , to fhew the realbn why I have thought the teftimony of either of thefe two forts of perfons fo inconfiderable in the matter of our future difcourfe ; which being hiftorical^ and that of the greateft antiquity , little relief is to be expe([^ed from either of them in order thereto. But to return to Kir- der. It is freely granted, That Jofephus^ an Authour of credit and age^ fumcient to give his opinion in this cafe, doth very frequently cite Manetho in his leaves out "Ei^ivvvT}!^, which decides the controverfie^ and makes it clear,' that he fpeaks of the fame Manetho of whom we have been difcourfing. Thus it ftill appears that this Mamtho is no elder than the time of ftolomy Fhiladelphus^ w^hich was the thing to be proved. 5ft?. 10. Mow for BerofuSy although tliQ Chaldeans had occafion e- nough given them before this time , to produce their Anti- quities by the Jews converfe with them in Babykn-y yet we find this Authour thQ firfi who durft adventure them abroad, fuch as they wxre, in Greek. Now that this Berofus publifhed his Hiftory after the time mentioned, I thus prove. Tatianus Jfyrius tells us that he writ the Cbaldaick Hiftory in three Books, and dedicated them to AntiochuSy tuS^ "^ihiVKov relTa, pr t> E ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^^^ ^^ ^^^ fragment of Tatianus preferved in Eufebius ; /.To. ;>. ^89! t)Ut it muft be acknowledged that in the Fark edition of Tati- 0d, R9b. ste^h. anus , as well as the Bafil^ it is thus read, x.aT 'AAeJctrJ^e^y >ty- yaV, "Avltoxv ^ iJ^' cLvi^v Tej.T(i>, here it relates to the third from Alexander , in the other , to the third from Seleucus ; Now if we reckon the third fo as to take the perfon from whom we reckon in, for the firft, according to the reading in Eufe- hiusy it falls to be Antiochus called ^i'^^ according to the o- y. Seal, tie £- ther reading it falls to be Antiochus Soter-y for Seleucus {ucccq- wend. Temp^ ^j^j Alexander in the Kingdom of Syria j Antiochus Soter, Seleu- ' ^' ^' ^^*' cm ; Antiechus :^^j, Antiochus Soter, But according to either of thefc readings, our purpofe is fufficiently proved. For An- tiochus Soter began to reign in Syria in the fixth year of Ttol, Philadelphus in ^y£gypt \ Antiochus ^U fucceeded him in the i2d. year of Fhiladelphus *, now the fooneft that the Hifto- ry of Berofus could come forth , muft be in the reign of Antiochus Soter y which according to our accounts is fome com- petent time after the tranflation of the Scripture into Greek ; but if it were not till the time of Antiochus stoo we cannot but imagine that the report of the account of ancient times in the Scriptures was fufficiently divulged before the puhlifhing of this Hiftory of Berofus ; and, it may be, Berofus might fome- what (boner than others underftand all tranfaBions at Alexan- dria y becaufe the place of his chief refidence was where Vtolo- T^ T'A r^ wy Fhiladelphus was born , which was in the Ifle of Co. But /. I. f. 1 3. VoJJms goes another way to work, to prove the time of Berojusy which chap. 3. The Truth of Scripture-Hiflory ajferted, ^i which is this. He quotes it out of Pliny that Berofus recor- p//„, hijl. not. ded the Hiftory of 480. years, which, faith bey mud be rec- /. 7. c, $6. koned from the ara of Nabomfer, Now this began in the feco?2d year of the 8th. Olympiad^ from which time if we rec- kon 48ojyejrj, it falls upon the latter end of Antiochus Soter 5 and lo his Hiftory could not come out before the 22d. of Ftolomy Philadelphtis, or very little before. Thus we have made it evident, That thefe two great Hiftorians are younger even than the tranjlation of the Bible into Greeks by which it ap- pears probable that they were provoked to publi(h their fabu- lotts Dynafties to the world. And ^0 much to (hew the infiiffi- tiency of the Chaldean Hiftory, as to the account of ancient times : Which we (hall conclude with the cenfure of Strabo^ a grave and judicious Authour , concerning the antiquities of the Verfians^ Medes^ and Syrians^ which, faith he, have not ob- tained any great credit in the world , J) a. rlw r cuyye^^icov atko. ^^^i^- ^' *'• ^nfla. i^ for Poems were only Ao;ji>/ ufi.ujtKta-fj^oty Lejfons fit to be fung among them; thence, faith he, is the original of the pa-^Jicu, &c. For thefe were thofe Poems which were fung ^ fd^S'a when they held a branch of Laurel in their hands ^ as Plutarch tells us they were wont to do Homers Iliads ^ others w^rtfung to xhtHarp^ zsHe- Jiod^s i§)4c : befides, faith Strabo, that Profe is called 0 m^di \oyQ-, Sympof. argues that it is only a bringing down of the higher ftrain in ule before. But however this were in general, as to the Gre- cians, it is evident that Poetry was firft in ufe among them •, for in their elder times when they firft began, to creep out of Barbarifm, all the Philofophy and InftruBion they had, was from their Poets, and was all couched in verfe ; which Plutarch not only confirms, but particularly inftanceth in Orpheus, Hefwd, Parmenides, Xenophanes, Empedocles and Thales -, and hence Horace de arte Poetica^ of the ancient Poets before Plomer, De Pyth- Oktc. -fuit h^c fapientia quondam Public a privatis fecernere, facra profants : Concubitu prohibere vago : dare jura mar it is- 1 Oppida moliri : leges incidere ligno. Sic honor & nomen divinis vatibm atque Carminibm venit. From 5' 4 Origines Sacr(t : Book I. Difrt. in Hef. FroiT! hcncc HS H^i;^/^j obfervcs, the Pvets were anciently called ^^f.^- Jijclffit^Kot ; and the ancient j(/7e^e'fkj of the Fhiicfophers con- taining matters of morality, were called AafjiAirt ^ a'c/b^Va, of which many are mentioned in their lives by Diogenes Laer- tins ; in the fame fence wxvtCarmina anciently ufed among the Latines for precepts of morality, as in that cdleBion of fef/?. i?iTe^')^h Orpheus /r/? tnftruBed them in the [acred myfieries, and to ah- fiain from /laughter : which is to be underftood of the (i^^/iaui^ the killing ofbeafts infacrifice, which probably was in ufe among them before, as 4 remainder of ancient tradition, till Orphem brought his t^gyptian dodrine into requeft among them. The myfteries of Ofiris^ faith Diodorus^ were tranfplanted into Greece under the name of Dionyfius or Bacchus^ and Jfis under Ceres or Magna Mater , and the punijhment and pleafures after this life from the rites of fepulture among them ; Charon^s wafting of fouls from the lake /{cherufia in ^Aigypt , over which they were wont to fend the dead bodies, taufanias tells us, that Lacon. />. 95. the 6'/?^r/-^;?j derived the worfliip of Ceres c thoni a from Or- Corinth. p. ^1. pheus, and the «y£ginat^ the worfhip of Hecate. Befides which y.CRhod.^nt. ]^^ inftitutcd new rites and myfteries of his own, in which the Le . .IS' p'9' initiated were called 'Of^5r.>T5As?a/, and required amoftiblemn oath from all of them never to divulge them, which was af- ter obferved in all thofe profane myfteries which in imitation of thefe were fet up among the Greeks, Strabo thinks the myfteries of Orpheus were in imitation of the old Cotyttian Geogr. 1. 10. snd Eendidian myfteries among the Thracians\ but Herodotus with more probability parallels them and the Dionyfian with the Egyptian , from which we have already leen that Or- Enterp. p. 1 14. P^^^^ derived his ; who is conceived by Georgius Cedrenus and Ed. H. St. Timotheus in Eujebius , to have lived about the time of G/- ^ <^,ja.m ' ^^^^ ^^ .7^^^^ of Israel \ but there is too great confufion orph. concerning his age , to denne any thing certainly about it. Which arifcth moft from the feveral perfons going under his .nam.e, of which, befides this, were in all probability t^o movt\'t.\\QQntan Heroick Poet ^ called by Suidas^ Ciconaus ^ or y^rcaSy who lived two Ages before Homer., and he that goes under the name of Orpheus., whofe Hymns are ftiU extant, but are truly afcribed to Onomacritus the Athenian., by Clemens A- lexandrmus^ Tatianus Affyrius, Suidm., and others, who flou- riihed in the times of the Fiftftratid^ at Athens. We are like then Chap. 4. the Truth of Scripture- Hiflory ajjertecf. S7 then to have little relief for findingout oi truth in the ?f tirne^ and we have nothing but the meer fke- htons of them left. :o tell us that once fuch perfons were, and thought theinft^lves concerned to give the world Ibme account of their being in it. Whereby may be likewife k^n the re- markabk providence of Gody concerning the facred Hiftory y which though of far greater antiquity than any of thefc, hath furvived them all, and is ftill preferved with as much pu- rity and incorruption as a Book paffing through fo many hands was capable of. But of that in its due place. But yet if the Greek Biftorians that are yet extant, w^ere Scci, 8. of more undoubted credit than thofe that are loft, we might eafily bear with our lofing Ibme old ftories, if we gained fome authentick hiftory by it accompliftied in all its parts : but even this w^e are far from in the Greek Hiftory ; for the Biftorians themfelves do either confefs their own ignorance of ancient timeSy or da moft palpably difcover ity which was the third and laft confideration touching the credibility of the Grecian Hiftory, That moft grave and accurate Hiftorian Thucydides. than whom fcarce ever any Grecian difcovered more an impartial love to the truth in what he writ , doth not only confefs, but largely prove the tmpojfibility of an exaft account to be given of the times preceding the Pelo- ponnefian War^ in the very entrance into his Hiftory : For^ faith he, the matter preceding that timey cannot now through the length of time be accurately difcovered or found out by us. All that he could find in the ancient ftate of Greece was a great deal of Confufiony unquiet ftationSy frequent removals, continual piracies, and no fetled form of Commonwealth, W hat certain account c^n be then expeded of thofe times, when a moft judicious Writer, even of Athens its felf, acknowledg- cth 6z Origines Sacr^ : Book I. cth fuch a Chaos in their ancient Hiftory I And Flntarch, a later Author indeed, but fcarce behind any of them, if we believe Taurus in A, Gellius^ for learning and prudence, dares not, we fee, venture any further back than tlie time of The^ feus J for before that time, as he compares it , as Geogra- phers in their A^aps, when they have gone as far a^ they can^ fill up the empty f pace with fome nnpafjable mountains^ or frozen feas or devouring fands -, fo thofe who give an account of elder times^ are fain to infert T^^We/Vf )y T£^>/j(i, fome wonder full and Tragical Jlories, which (as he faith) have neither any truth nor certainty in them. Thus we fee thoie who were beft able to judge of the Greek Antiquities^ can find no fure footing , to ftand.on in them; and what bafis can we find for our faith, where they could find fo little for their knowledge? And thofe who have been m.ore daring and venturous than thefe perfons mentioned, what a Labyrinth have they run thcmfelves into? how many confuftons and contradiBions have they involved themlelves in ? fometimes writing the pafiages of other Countries for thofe of Greece^ and at other times lb confounding times, perfons and places, that one mjight think they had only a defign upon the underftandings of their rea- ders, to make them play at Blind-mans-bujf in learching for the Kings o( Greece, SeU. 9. But as they are ^0 confufed in their own Hiftory, fb they are as ignorant and fabulous when they dare venture over their own threfholds and look abroad into other Countries ; we certainly owe a great part of the lamentable ignorance of the true original of moft Nations to the pitiful! account the Greek Authours have given of them ; which have had the fortune to be entertained in the world with fo much efteem and veneration, that it hath been thought learning enough to be acquainted with the account which they give of Na- tions. Which I doubt not hath been the great reafon fo many fabulous relations, not only of nations but perfons and feveral animals never exifting in the world , have met with fo much entertainment from the lefs inquifitive world. The Greek Writers, it is evident, took up things upon trufi as much as any people in the world did , being a very weak and inconfiderable Nation atfirft, and afterwards the knowledge they had was generally borrowed from other Nations, which the chap. 4. The Truth of Scripture- Hiflory affertecL 6^ the wile men only fuited to the temper of the Greeks, and - lb made it more fabulous than it was before. As it was cer- tainly the great defeat of the natural phdofophy of the Greek/ ^ { as it hath been ever (ince in the world ) that they were ib ready to form Theories upon fbme principles or hypothefeSy which they only received by Tradition from others, without ktzhmg their knowledge from the experiments of nature \ and to thefe they fuited all the phenomena of nature ; and whar was not fait able was rejedted ^smonfirous and anomalous: fo it vvas in .their Hiftory wherein they had feme fabulous kypotbefes they took for granted without enquiring into the truth and certainty of them , and to thefe they fuit whatever light • ey gained in aiter-times of the fiate of Foreign Nati- ms, wnich hath made Truth and Antiquity wreftle ib much with the corruptions which eat into them through the pride and ignorance of the Greeks, Hence they have always fuited the Hiftory of other Nations with the account they give of their own ; and where nothing could ferve out of their own Hiflory to give an account of thQ original of other Nations, they ( who were never backward at fi£tions ) have made a Founder of them fuitable to their own language. The truth is, there is nothing in the world ufefull or beneficial to man- kind, but they have made fliift to find the Authour of it among themfelves. If we enquire after the original of Jgri- culture^ we are told of Ceres and Triptolemus ^ if of paflurage^ we are told of an Arcadian Fan ; if of wine, we prefently hear of a Liber Pater: if of Iron inftruments, then v;ho but Vulcan f if of Mufeck, none like to Apollo, If we prefs them then with the Hiftory of other Nations, they are as well pro- vided here : if we enquire an account of Europe, Afia or Z/- bya ; for the firft we are told a fine ftory of Cadmus his ftfter^ for the fecond of Prometheus his mother of that name, and for the third of a daughter of Epaphus, If we are yet fb curious, as to know the original of particular Countries ; then Ita- lia muft find its name from a Calf of Hercules, becaufe 70-^0- in Greek will fignifie fome fuch thing ; Sardinia and Africa muft be from Sardos and Afer two fons of Hercules ; but yet . if thefe will not ferve, Hercules fliall not want for children to people the world ; for we hear of Scythes, Galatas, LyduSy ibme other fons of his, that gave names to Scythia, Lydia^, Galatia 5 dA Origines Sacra : Book I. Galatia ; with the fame probability that Media had its name from Mededy and Spain and Lufitania from Pj« and Lufiis^ two companions of Bacchus, If F^y?^ want a Founder, they have one Ferfeus an Argive ready for it ; if Syria^ Babylonia and Arabia want reafbns of their names, the prodigal Greeks will give Apollo three fons, .^^r^/, Babylon and Arabs^ rather than they flvali be heretical Acephalifis. This vanity of theirs was miverfaly not confined to any place or age , but as any Nation or People came into their knowledge, their Gods were not fo decrepit , but they might father one fin more upon them, rather than any Nation fliould ho, filia populi^ and want a father. Only the grave Athenians thought fcorn to have any father afligned them ; their only ambition was to be ac- counted Aborigines & genuini terra^ to be the eldeft fons of their Teeming mother the earthy and to have been born by the fame equivocal generation that Mice and Frogs are from the impregnated (lime of the earth. Are we not like to have a wonderfull account of ancient times from thole who could arrogate to thcmfelves lb much knowledge from fuch flender and thin accounts of the Originals of people which they gave, and would have the world to entertain with the greateft veneration upon their naked words ? Have we not indeed great realbn to hearken to thole who did fo fre- quently difcover their afFedion to Fables, and manifeft their ignorance when ever they venture upon the Hiftory of other Nations ? SeB. 1 0. The truth is, Herodotus himfelf ( whom Tully calls the Father of Hifiory^ which title he delerves at leaft in regard of antiquity y being the eldeft of the extant Greek Hifiorians) hath ftood in need of his Compurgators, who yet have not been able to acquit him offabuloufi/efsy but have fought to make good his credit by recrimination, or by making it ap- pear that Herodotus did not fully believe the ftories he tells, but took them upon trull: himfelf, and fo delivers rhem to the world. Some impute it to the ingenuity of Herodotus, that he calls his books of Hiftory by the name of the Mufes, on purpole to tell his Readers they muft not look for meer Hiftory in him , but a mixture of fuch relations , which though not true, might yet pleale arid entertain his Read-ers. Though others think they were not fo infcribed by himfelf, but Chap. 4. The Truth of Scripture-Hijlory ajfertei. 6$ but the names were given to them by the Greeks from the admiration his Hiftory had among them. However this were, this we are certain, that Herodotm was not firft fufpe^^ed of fklfliood in theie latter ages of the world, but even among the Greeks themlelves there have been found Ibme that would un- dertake to make good that charge againft him. For fo SnidM tells us of one HarpQcration ^lius^ who writ a book on pur- pole to dilcover the falQiood of Herodotus^ 'tti^ n h^Ia'^svc'^/ t\w 'h^c^ot« i<^ej.Av. Flutarch his Books are well known of the fpight or malignity of Herodotus y but the occafion of that is fufficiently known likewifc, becaufe Herodotm had given no very favourable character of Vint arch's Comtrey. Strabo Qeogr. 1. 17. likewife feems to accuie Herodotm much of nugacity and mix^ hg prodigious fables with his Hiftory ; but, I confcfs, obferving the grounds on which Flutarch infifts againft Herodotus , I am very prone to think that the ground of the great pique in Ibme of the Greek Writers againft Herodotus ^ was, that he told too many tales out of School^ and had difcovered too much of the Infancy of Greece^ and how much the Grecians borrowed of the Egyptian fuperftitions : which Plutarch expreHy Ipeaks of, that Herodotus was too much led afide, ^ A)yu';^iav dhA^o- j^^ ^^^^^ ^ , fav eivAr§i7mv» Although therefore Herodotus may not be much to blame in the things which the Grecians moft charge him with , yet thofe who favour him moft cannot excufe his palpable miftakes in ibme things, and ignorance in others, c.^ppion.l. i. Jofephus thinks he was deceived by the ^Algyptian Priefts in Camn. ifagog. things relating to the ftate of their affairs, of which J of. Sea- ^- 3- Uger gives many accounts ; either ^ faith he, the perfons who gave him his intelligence were ignorant themfelves ; or elfe^ like true fiy£gyptian5 , they were cunning enough , but impofed upon Herodotus being a ftr anger and unacquainted with their artifi^ C€s 'y or elfe he did not underftand his Interpreter, or was deceived by him-y or laftly, Herodotus might have fo much of a Grecian in him y oi to adulterate the true Hiftory with fome fables of his own ; wherefore he rather adheres to Manetho than Herodo- tus as to the Egyptian Hiftory : who yet elfewhere ( I will not fay with what conftancy to himfelf ) vouchfafes him this ^^^^^ high elogiurriy that he is, Scrinium originum Gracarum & Bar- ^ufeb, lyjt. bararum, auBor k dottis nunquam deponendus. K It 66 ^ Origines Sacra : Book I. S€^, lu It cannot be denyed but a great deal of very ufefuU Hifto- ry raay be fetched out of him ; yet who can excufe his Jg- norance^ when he not only denies there is an Ocean compaffing Bifl. 1.2. f 4. the Land, but condemns the Geographers for afferting it ? jUn- lefs this might be any plea for his ignorance in Geographj, that he had fb many great names after him guilty of the fame: Witneis Jriftotles fufpicion that the Bidies (hould be joyned to Eur0pe about the Straights^ where they feigned Hercules \m pillars to be. And the Thereans ignorance where any fuch place as Libya was, when the Oracle bid them ^^Tintz Colony there. Would it not have been worth ones while to have heard th^ ghat noife the Sun u(ed to make every night when he doufed his head in the Ocean^ as none of the moil ignorant Greeks imagined ? And to have feen the Sun about Hercules his pillars to be a hundred times bigger than he appeared to Ihem, as they commonly fanfied. Was not Alexander y think ^ we, well tutoured in his Cefmography by his Afafier Arifiotle, Miji. jilexand) ^yj^^j^ j^^ ^j-j^. ^^^^ ^^ j^jg Mother, he had found out the head of Nilm in the Eafi Indies ? as Arrian relates the ft6ry. No wonder then his fouldiers (hould miftake the mountain Paropa- mifwi in the Indies^ for Caucafm near Colchis^ when even their learned men thought Colchis the utmoft boundary of the World on that fide , as Hercules his pillars on this. What a lamentable account then were they able to give of the mod ancient times, who were ^0 ignorant of the ftate of the world in their own time, when Learning was in its height in Greece ^ and frequent difcoveries daily made of the world, by the wars which were made abroad ! Eratofthenes confefleth the Gre- cians were ignorant of a great part of Afia^ and the Northern- parts of Europe before Alexa?idefs expedition ; and Strah confefTeth as much of the We fern parts of Europe till the Ro- ^eogrj. I. man expeditions thither. Falm Maotis and Colchis , faith he^ were not fully known till the time of Mithridates^ nor Hyrca- niUy BaEiriana, and Scythia,^ till the Parthian wars, Eratofthe- nes mentions Ibme who thought the Arabian Sea to be only a Lake ; and it further argues their ignorance in Geography , that the later Geographers always corre5 the errors of the el- der, as Ptolomy doth MarinuSy Eratofthenes thole before him, Hipparcus Eratofthenes , and Strabo not only both them , biit Eudoxus^ Ephorusj Dic^archuSy FolybiuSy VoftdoniuSy and almoft all Chap. 4. The Truth of Scripture- Hijlory ajferted. 6j all that had writ before him. I infill on thefe things, not that I would deftroy the credibility of any humane hiftory , where the Authours are guilty of any miftakes (for that were to take away the credit of all humane Hiftory ) but to fhew how infiifficient thofe Hiftories are to give us a certain account of the original oi Nations^ who were fb unacquainted with the ftate of thofe Nations which they pretended to give an ac- count of. For where there is wanting divine revelation ( which was not pretended by any Creek Hiftorians ; and if it had, had been eafily refuted ) there mufl: be fuppofed a full and exadt knowiedge of all things pertaining to that which they pretend to give an account of; and if they difcover ap- parent defeU znd^ infujjiciency (which hath been largely mani- fefted as to them, in the precedent difcourfe) we have ground to deny the credibility of thofe Hiftories upon the account of fuch defecfl and infufficiency. So much then will abundantly fuffice for the making good \he firft argument againft the credibility of profane hiftories , as to the account which they give of ancient times, different from the Word of God. K2 CHAT. (58 Ofigines Sacra! : Book L CHAP. V. The general uncertainty of Heathen Chronology. The rvant of credibility in Heathen Hiftory further proved from the uncertainty and confufion in their accounts of ancient times ; that difcovered by the uncertain form of their years. An enquiry into the different forms of the tAlgyptian years j the firfi of thirty Days , the fecond of four Months ; of both infiances given in the o£gyptian hiftory,. Of the Chaldean ac- iountsy and the firfi Dynafiies mentioned by Berofus , how they may be reduced to probability. Of the SeB I TpHE next thing to manifeft how little there is of credit JL bility in tht account of ancient timesy rt^ovttd by thQ hi-* ftories of heathen Nations^ is, the uncertainty , confufion and am^ biguity in the account which they give of thofe times. If we fup- pofe them not at all defeBive as to their records ^ if yet we find the account given fo perplexed^ ambiguous and confufedy that we can find no certainty at all of^ the meaning of it, we have very little reafbn to entertain it with any certain affeht unto it* Now this will be made evident by thefe things, i. The uncer- tainty of their Chronology ^ whereon their whole account depends, T, The multitude of Impoftures taken for ancient Hifiories. 3. Tlje uncertain meaning of thefe Char ail ers wherein their an- cient Hiftories were preferved. I begin with the great uncer- tainty of the heathen Chronology ^ which will be manifefted by two things ; firft, the uncertain form of their years : fecond- ly, the want or uncertainty of their ^^^'Tryiytcccja.y or certain fix- ed JSpocha^s from which to derive their account of ancient times, Firft, th.^ uncertain form of their years \ this of it fclf isfufficient to deftroy the credibility of their accounts of antiquity, if it be manifefted that they had d\Stv^ntformsoi years in ulc among them 5 and it be uncertain to which to refer their accounts they L. chap. 5'. The Truth of Scripture-Hiflory ajferted. dp they give ; for if years be Ibmetimes Lunar ^ fbmetimes Solar^ and fometimes but of thirty days^ fometimes of four Months^ ibmetimes o^ three hundred andfixtydays^ fometimes three hun- dred fixty five ^ fometimes /(?Kr times three hundred fixty five in their tetraeteris^ fometimes eight times in their o^aeterts^ fometimes more, what certainty can we pofTibly have which of them to fix their accounts to? Efpecially when they only give them in general, and never tell us which ©f them they mean, which may make it fhrcwdly fufpicious that their in^ tent is only to impofe on our underftandings, and not to deal fairly and truly with us. We (hall therefore fo much explain the different form of their years, as thereby to (hew what un- certainties we are left to by them : Where we meddle not with their 7ro^/V^/ and j4ftronomical y^rs, but chiefly thofe which were in civil ufe among the feveral Nations we fpeak to. A year is nothing elfe but a Syflem of days ^ and is thete^ fore capable of as great varity^ as days are in being joyned to- gether 5 but ufually there were Ibme other le(rer Syfiems of ^/^jyj than thofe which are called jy^^r/, out of which the o- ther ^othrejult. Such is the iT-mniJUiav.ov the week^ which, as Jofeph Scaliger faith, was r€S omnibus Orientis populis ah ultima ^^ ^rnendnt, ufque antiquitate ufitata^ a thing in continual ufe among the Ea- ^^'"^•l-^- fterh Nations^ though it be but of late reception into the parts of Europe^ and no elder than Chriftianity among them. A- mong the Romans wasjufed an l^-m^^esv, which was for the lake of the NundinahoXmrnng ev-ery ninth day. The Mexicans ^.s Scaliger tells us, reckon all by a TeiG-K^tchKAnf^^tfv, a Syjlem of thirteen days. Next to thefe were their Months^ which were either Lunar or Solar, The Lunar were; either from the MoQiis return to the fame point of the Zodiack again, called '2yseio«r©- aiKUumy which wa&lefs than twenty eight days ; but this was of no ufe in civil computations ;or el(e from one co7i- junBion of the Moonmth the Sun to another^ which was called eiivoi"©- TiKlwm ; or elfe from the ^v^ phafis oi Xh^ Moon^thefc- cond day after its c^/V//i,called poto-n and drnKfiiffJi aiKmv\i ;fomei . as the G'r^c/i2«j, reckoned their Lunar months from the coitus ^ as Scaliger proves out of Vitruvius ; others from the phafis^ as fome Eajiern Nations did ; as Xht-Jews began their obfervati- on of the New Moons from the firft phafts or appearance of her. after the coitus. The Solar months were either natural), - - fuch. JO Or igines Sacra : Book I. fuch as were defined by the Sun's palfage from one fign of the Zodiack to another ; or civile whereby the months were equal- ly divided into 30 days apiece, as in the Grecian and zAigyp- ti an year, SeB. 2. Having thus far feen of what the year confifts, we now pro- ceed to (hew that the ancient Nations did not obferve one conftant certain form of year among them, but had feveral in ufe^ to which their accounts may be referred. And becaufe the zy£gyptians are fuppofed to have been beft skilled as to the form of thejv^^^r, according to that of MacrobiuSy Anni certus utnrn.Li, modhs apud folos femper t^gyptios fuit : We fhall particularly • ^ ^' demonftrate the variety of years in ufe among them : By which w^e fliall fee what great uncertainty there is in their accounts of their Dynafties, For firft it is evident that the time of 30 days was among the ancient zy£gyptians accounted styear, for which we have the teftimony of Plutarch in Numa, 'Af/j'Tnioti Of^^vicLi©- iZo IviAVTii ^7« TiT^/iJilw©- ; "The - rumfpacio illujlrat. It is then evident that this year ofthir- ty days was in ufe among the Egyptians j the only fcruple is whether it was ufed in their facred accounts or no ; and that it Was, we have a pregnant teitimony in Plutarch^ in the fore- cited place J fpeaking of the ^^gyptians great pretence to an- tiauity, he gives this account of it ; taw^©- a/m^vov iivr -n^ifjSpQi. They reckon at^ infinite number of years in their ac- counts^ becaufe they reckot^ their months infiead of years. According to this computation, it will be no difficult matter to reduce the vaft accounts of the Egyptian antiquity to Ibme proportion, and to reconcile their exorbitant Dynafiies with fobriety zn^ truth., efpecially as to the account given of them by liihlhth I. I. Diodorus Siculus ; for fo Diodorus gives in their accounts, that the Gods and Hero'^s raigned in ^ of all the Land of Mgypt, which ftill in Scripture is called the Land of Mifraim from the lirft Planter of it : and this was of very great antiquity ; and therefore Funccim (though improbably) thinks this Pharach to have been Ofi- ris^ and Rivet thinks Mifraim might have been alive till that time \ here then we find no Dynafiies co-exifiing^ but one Kingdom undtL ouQ King. Ifwedefcend fbmewhat lower, to the times of Jacob and Jofeph , the evidence is fo undoubted of JEgypt's being an entire Kingdom under one King, that he may have juft caufe to fufpeft the eyes either of his body or " his mind that diftrufts it. For what more evident, than that Pharaoh who preferred Jofeph^ was King of all the Land of JEgypt ? Were not the fev en years of famine over all the Land of JEgypt ? Gen. 41.55. Wiu not Jofeph fet by Pharaoh over all the Land ^/^gypt ? Gen, 41. 41,43, 45. And did »^r Jofeph , go over all the Land (^/iEgypt to gather corn ? Gen. 41. 46. Nay^ did he not buy all the L.and of yEgypt /<7r Pharaoh ? Gen, 47. 20. Can there poflibly be given any fuller evidences of an ' entire Kingdom, than thefe are, that jEgypt was fuch then ? Afterwards we read of one King after another in JEgypt for the fpace of nigh two hundred years , during the children of Jfrael s Jlavery in Mgypt -, and was not he, think we. King o- ver all Mgypt, in whofe time the children of Ifrael went out thence ? And in all the following Hiftory of Scripture , is there not mention made of JEgypt ftill as an entire Kingdom , and of one King over it ? Where then is there any place for thefe co-temporary Dynafiies in JEgypt ? No where that I know of, but in the fancies of fome learned men, Seci. 8. Indeed there is one place that feems to give fome counte- nance to this opinion ; but it is in far later times than the firft Dynafties of Manet ho are fuppofed to be in, which is in If at. 19.1. fvhere God faith, he would fet the /Egyptians againji the /Egyptians, and they fhallfght every one againji his brother. City againft Gity, and Kingdom againfi Kingdom. Where it (eems that there were fcveral Kingdoms then exiftent among the ^- gyptians -, but the Septuagint very well renders it /o/^s ^ yo^cir. . now Kj^flf among the JEgypUans^ as Epiphanim and others td\ us, chap. $. The Truth of Scripture-Hiftory ajferted, 8i us, notes rial l;(^ our Counties are , and therefore Fliny renders yof^cl by prafeBura ; thefe were the feveral Tro- vinces of Mgypt^ of yNhkh th^VQW^vQ thirty fix in Mgypt, ten in Thebais^ ten in Delta^ the other fixteen in the midland parts ; fo that by Kingdom againft Kingdom, no more is meant than one Province being fet againft another, Ifaac Vojfm thinks the number of the ancient Nomi was tw-elve, and that over every bne of thefe was a peculiar King ; and that this number may be gathered from the Dynafties of Manetho, letting afide the Dynafiies of the Perfians, Ethiopians, and Phosnicians : viz. the ThiniteSy Memphites, Elephantines, Heracleopolitans, Diofpolitan ThebanSy the lejfer Diofpolitans , Xoites, Tanites, Bubaftites, Saites, MendefianSy and Sebennytes : and fo that ^^^'^ was anciently a Dodecharchy, as England in the Saxons times was a Heptarchy. But as it already appears , there could be anci- ently no fuch Dodecharciy in ife^^/?^ ; fo it is likewife evident that this diftribution of E.gypt into Nomi is a /tf/'^r thing, and by moft Writers is attributed to Sefoofis or Sefofiris , whom Jofephus fuppofeth to be Sefack King of JEgypty co-temporary with Rehobam. Indeed if we believe Gelaldinm the Arabick vid.Boch.Geogr. Hiftorian cited by Kircher, the moft ancient diftributionof M- P- '• ^- 4- ^- 4- gypt was into four parts. Mifraim held one part to himfelf, oedip.^gypt. and gave his Son Copt another, Efmun z third , and Jtrib a ^'■^; •^"^''^* '' fourth part; which divifion the ftme Authour affirms to have continued till the time of Jofephy who made a new diftribution of the whole Land : After him Sefoftris divided the whole in- to thirty feveral iV(?w/ ; fb Kircher will needs have it, that of the three feveral parts of I^gypt , each might have for fome myftical fegnification its ten Nomi, of which every one had its diftin^ and peculiar God it worftiipped , and a particular Pj- /^c^ in the Labyrinth , and a peculiar Sa}ihedrin or Owr/- of Juftice belonging to it. But it evidently appears by that vain-glorious Oedipmy that it is a far eafier matter to make new myfterieSy than to interpret old ones, which as it might be cafily diicovered in the main foundations whereon thzt ftru^ure ftandsy fo we have fome evidence of it in our firft entrance into it, in this part of Chorography of /Egypt. For from whence had he this exa£t divifion of Mgypt in»to thirty Nomi, ten of which belonged to the upper JEgypt, or Thebais, ten to Deltas M or 8^ Origines Sacra : Book I. or the lower JE^gypt, and the ten remaining to the midland Syntag. i. c. 2. Ccmtrey? Hath he this from Ptolomy^ whofe S£i)em€ of the ^- 7- , leveral Nomi he publiflieth ? No, Ttolomy and P//;z)/ by his own confeffion afterwards add many other to thefe, as OmphiU^ ThanturiteSj Tanites^ Phatnites, Neut^ Heptanomos^ &c. Hath he it from Strabo^ whofe authority he cites for it? No fuch Geogr. 1 17. matter. For Strabo faith exprefly that Thebais had ten Nomi^ Delta ten^ and the Midland fixteen\ only fomeare of opinion, faith he, that there were as many Nomi as Palaces in the La- byrinth^ which were toward thirty \ but yet the number is un- certain ftill. We fee by this how ominom it is for an Oedipus toftumble at the threjhold, and how eafie a matter it is to in- terpret myfteries^ if we may have the making of them. We fee then no evidence at all for thefe co- temporary Dynafiies of . Manetho ; which yet if we ftiould grant , would be a further argument of the uncertainty of heathen Chronology , when a- mong them implicite yQ3.vs are given out to the world forfolid; fb that which way Ibever Manetho his Dynaftiesht taken, they will prove the thing in hand, whether we fuppofe them at leaft mod part fabulous , or (hould grant he had taken thole in fucceffion to each other, which were co^exiftent with one another. CHAP, chap. 6. The Truth of Scripture-Htflory ajferted, 83 CHAP. VI. The uncertain Epocha's of Heathen Chronology. An account given of the defect of Chronology in the eldefi times. Of the Solar year among the Egyptians, the original of the EpaBs^ the antiquity of Intercalation among them. Of the fe- veral Canicular years ; the difference between Scaliger and Pe- tavius confidered. The certain Epocha's of the ^Egyptian Hiftory no elder than Nabonalfer. Of the Grecian accounts, -The fabuloufnefs of the Heroic al age 0/ Greece. Of the anci- ent Grecian Kingdoms. The beginning of the Olympiads, The uncertain Origins of the Wejiern Nations, Of the Latin Dynafiief. The different PaUlia (?/Rome. The uncertain rec- koning Ab U. C. Of impofiures as to ancient Hiflories, Of Annius, Inghiramius, and others. Of the charaBers ufed by Heathen Priefis. No facred charaBers among the Jews, Tlje' partiality md inconfiflency of Heathen Hiflories with each other. From all which the want of credibility in them m to an . account of ancient times is clearly demonftrated, THE next thing to evidence ^ht uncertainty of the heathen ^^^^ ^^ Chronology^ is, the want of certain parapegmata^ or fome fixed periods of time ., according to which the account of times muft be made. For if there be no certain Epochas by which to reckon thQ fiicceffioyi of ages ., the difiance of intervals, and all intervening accidents., we muft of uqqq ff\ty fluBuate in continu- al uncertainties , and have no fure foundation to bottom any account of ancient times upon. The great reafon of this de- fedt, is, the little care which thofe who lived in the eldefl times had to preferve the memory of any ancient tradition a- mong themielves , or to convey it to pofterity in fuch a way as might be leaft liable to impofture. Of all kinds of Learnings Chronology was the moft rude in eldeft times ; and yet that is well called by Scaliger., The life and foul of Hiftory , without which , Hiftory is but a confufed lump, a mere Mola , an indi- gefted piece of'flefh., without life or form. The ancient accounts of the world were merely from year to year, and that with abundance of obfcurity, uncertainty and variety : fbmetimes go- M 2 ing b^. 84 Origines Sacra : Book I. ing by the courfe of the Moon , and therein they were as mu- table as the Moon herfelf, how to conform thejy^^r regularly to her motion ; and it was yet greater difficulty to regulate it by the courfe of the Sm , and to make the accounts of the Sun and Moon meet. There was fo much perplexity and confufi- on about the ordering of a fmgle year , and fb long in moft Nations before they could bring it into any order , that we are not to expeft zny fixed periods by which to find out the fuccelTion of ages among them. Among the ^^gyptians who are fuppofed moft ski] full in the account of the year, it was a long time before they found out any certain courfe of it. It is agreed by moft , that when the Egyptian Priefis had found out the form of the year by the courfe of the Sun (which L. I. r. 50. is attributed by Diodorm to the Heliopolitan Triefis ) yet the year in common ufe was only of 360 days , which in any great period of years rauft needs caufe a monftrom confufion, by reafon that their Months muft of neceffity by degrees change their place, fo that in the great Canicular year fjS^cLi , and therein celebrated the Feftivals of their Gods , thence the names of the (everal i'Trctyofj^At were taken from the Gods ; the firft was called 'o^e/f, it being cele- brated in honour of him ; the fecond, 'Af^we/f, by which Sea- i>0 idil I. I. liger underftands Anub'tSy but Vojfim more probably the Senior Orm \ the third to Typho ; the fourth to Ifis ; the fifth to Neph- tha the wife oi Typho and fijler to Jfis, This courfe of the year Scal'lger 38. Chap. 6. The Truth of Scripture-Hijfory afferted. Z$ Scaliger thinks that the Egyptians reprefentcd by the Ser- pent called N«cn, being delcribed in a round cirle biting fbme part of his tail in his mouth, whereby faith he, they would have itunderftood, that the form of the year was not per- fect without that adjedion of five days to the end of the year : For to this day, faith he, the Coptites and ancient Rgypttans call the end of the year m^. It feems that af- terwards they underftood likewife the neceffity of intercalation of a day every fourth year, for the fake of the redundant quadrant each year above 365 days; which courfe of four years they called their Canicular year^ becaule they oblerved its defed in that time one whole day from the riling of the Dog-ftar: and belides that they called it ^^dctKoviTOi znd '(tQ- Qs?, & luftrum Sothiacuiny from S^aS/j the Dog-ftar : but Cenfori- De die Natali nus denies any nfe of intercalation among the Mgyptians in ^' '^* their civil year, although their Sacred and Hieroglyphic al years might admit of it. And upon this ground, 1 fuppofe the controverfie between thofe two learned perfons, Scaliger and F^/'^ww, concerning the antiquity of Intercalation among the Egyptians may be reconciled. For on the one fide it is pr p^tav, 4e apparent, that the ordinary or civil year did want inter cala- do^r.tm^J.%, tion^ by this teftimony of Cenforinus j Eorum annus civilii folos ^- *• h abet dies %6^ fine ullo int ere alar i '^ itaq\ quadriennium apud eos mo circiter die minus eft quam naturale quadriennium ; and thence faith he, it comes to pafs, that 'in 1461 years, which was the great Heliacal year^ it returns to the fame be- ginning., for then the Dog-ftar arifeth again upon the firft day of the month Thoyth^ as it did at the beginning of this great Canicular year ; and that this kind of civil year did continue among them in the time of Cenforinus (which was of the Dionyfian account 258) appears by this, that he faith in the year wherein he wrote his Book, the New-moon of Thoyth was before the feventh day of the Calends of July^ whereas 100 j't'^rj before, it was before the 12 of the C^- lendso{Auguft\ whence it is evident, that the Julian year, whatever fbme learned men pretend to the contrary ,was not in ordinary ufe among the JEgyptians in that time ; and that So- figenes when he correded the Roman account, and brought in ^^l^y^pj" Tom '{* the form of the Julian year, did not take his pattern from the ^ctaff. 7. ca^ 2. JEgyptian year^ but from the Grecians of Alexandria^ who did 8^ Origines Sacrce : Book I. did make ufe of the quadrant added to the \6$ years, which the M^yptians did not, as appears further by the golden circle in the inonument of Ofimandua^ (which Diodorus fpeaks of Bibltoth. I. I. out of Uecatd^m Mikftus) which was of ^65 cubits compafs^ c. 49. and divided into fo many fegments for every day with the obfervations of the rifmg and fetting of the feveral/^rj, and the effe^s portended by them. And the reafon why this D.fpl^ra y^^^ continued in civil ufe among the Mgyptians^ is well aC- cap. 6. ligned by Geminus^ that the /Egyptians according to a fuper- ftitious obfervation they had, would needs have their Feftivals run through every day in th^year. But now on the other fide, it is as evident that by continual obfervation th^ wifefi of the E.gyptian Triefis did difcern the necellity of intercalation, and that there wanted fix hours in every year to make it com- pleat ^ which every four years would make the intercalation Bibll \ cap ^ much by Diodorus is affirmed of the- Geog.l. 17. Theban Vriefis^ who were the beft Jflronomers, and by Stra- ho both of the Theban and Heliopolitan 5 and fb likewife i^- rapollo^ whofe work was to interpret the more abl^rufe Lear- ning of the Egyptian Vriefis : when^ (faith he) the Mgypti^ ans would exprefs a year ^ they name a quadrant^ becaufe from one rifing of the jiar Sothis to another^ the fourth part of a day is added ^ fo that the year confifis of ^6^ daysy (and a qua- drant muft be added, becaufe of the antecedents and confe- Hierop-l'ph /r ^^^^^^•^) therefore cvcry fourth year they reckon ^ fupernume- ^. J. rary day. How unjuftly Vetavius hath charged Scaliger with fahhood in reference to this tefiimony of Horapollo, meerly becaufe the citation did not appear in that Chapter men* tioned by Scaliger in the Book which Vetavius ufed, hath been already obierved by learned men ; whereupon Voffms condemns Fetavim of ftrange incogitancy, becaufe in three Er ditions mentioned by him, Scaliger's citation was right ; but De idol.l. I. Conringius hath fince pleaded in behalf of Petavius, that he c. 2S DjHer- ,-j-jj<,|jj. j^^j^^ ^^r^ ^^ ^j^g Edition of Caufmus diftintt from the ■ ' Other three 5 whereby we fee how fiuall a matter will beget I ! a feud between learned men, efpecially where prejudice hath lodged before, as is too evident in Vetavius his rough deal- ing on all occafions, with that very deferving perfon Jofeph I : Scaliger, But to return, from hence by degrees the /^gyp- '" tians proceeded to make greater periods of years (as Eudoxm carried Chap, 6. The Truth of Scripture^Hiflory ajfertei, %•] carried his OBaeterk into Greece from the Canicular year of the Egyptians) they framed from this a greater Canicular year, which had as many years as a Julian hath days ; and Laftly, the greatell Canicular year which comprehended four of the greater, and confifted of a period of 1461 years. But thus we fee, that the gxtzt periods of years among them rife gradually, a-s they grow more skilful in the underftand- ing the nature of the year ; and that they had anciently 410 certain periods to govern themfelves by in their computation of ancient times. Nay the M^yptians have not, as appears, any certain Epocha to go by elder than the ^Egyptian years of JVa- bonsjfer, and afterwards from the death of Alexander^ and Ttokmy Phi lade Iphus^ and Auguftus his Vi'flory at Acfium. If from the zy^gyptians we remove our difcourfe unto the Sec^. z. Grecians, we are ftill plunged into greater uncertainties, it being acknowledged by themfelves that they had no certain Succeffion of time before the Olympiads, To which purpofe the Teftimony of (/'arro in Cenforinus is generally taken no- tice of, diftributing time into three parts, reckoning two of them to be unknown znd fabulous^ and the hifiorical part of ^^^* tnCan. time to begin with the firft Olympiad, Indeed Scaliger and '^^^^^' ' ^' fome others are loth to rejedt all that fecond part of time as fabulous, which was in the interval between Deucalion's flood and the Olympiads ; and therefore they had rather call it He- roicaly though much corrupted with Fables, and to think that it was hifiorical as to perfons, but fabulous as to the aifli- ons of thofe perfons. But granting this ; yet we are wholly to feek for any certain account of the fucceffion of time and perfons for want of ibme certain Epocha\ which like the Folefiar (liould guide us in our paffage through that bound- kfs Ocean of the Grecian Hiftory. It muft be confeifed that fome of the learned Heathens have taken a great deal of pains this way to find out ibme certain periods to fix on in: the time before the olympiads^ as Vhilochorus, Apollodorus, and Diony- fins Halycarnajfenfts, and others, who out of their skill in A- ftronomy fought to bring down Ibme certain intervals between, the deftruBion of Troy^ and the firft Olympick game of Felops, reftored by Hercules and Atreu^, But granting that their E- pocba's were fixed and certain, that the deftrudlion of Troy was upon the 23 of Tlmrgelion.^ the nth month of the At- tJck 88 Origines Sacr^ : Book I. tick accQunt, and that the Olympick game fell out anfwerably to the ninth of our July^ and thefe things were evidently proved from Jftronomical obfervations •, yet how vaft an ac- count of time is loft quite beyond the fiege of Troy ! And be* fides that, as to all other accidents in the Intervals between thefe two EpoMs which could not be proved by Celeftial obfervations concurrent with them, they were left at a very great uncertainty ftill ; only they might guefs whether they approached nearer to one Epocha than the other by the feries , of Families and their Generations (three of which made a Century of years) whereby they might come to fome conje- ftures, but could never arrive at any certainty at all. SeU, 3. But that which is moft to our purpofe is, that all the Hi- ftory of the Original of Greece^ the Foundations of their fe- veral Kingdoms^ the fucceffion of their firft Kings, and all that comes under the name of the Hiftory of their ancient times, is clearly given over by their own moft skilful Chronologers, as matters out of the reach of any clear evidence. Thence come fuch great differences concerning the antiquity of their ancient Kingdoms ; the Argolick Kingdom by Dionyfim Haly- carnaff, is fuppofed to be the eldeft, and the Attick younger than it by 40 Generations, which according to their compu- tation comes to a 1 000 years, which is impoflTible ; and yet the Arcadians^ who gave themfelves out to be elder than the Moon, are fuppofed to be younger by him than the Grajhoppers of Athens by nine Generations ; and the Pthiotica^ under Deucalion, younger than the Arcadia by 42 Generations^ which Scaliger might well fay were impojfible and inconfiftent. The Si- cyonian^mg^om is by moft fuppofed to be of greateft antiquity De civit Dei ^^^^?> the Grecians^ from which Varro began his Hiftory ,as l.i6.<.i. ' S. Aiiftin tells us j and yet as to this, Panfanias only reckons the names of fome Kings there, without any fucceffion of time among them j and yet as to thofe names, Africanm (and Eufebius from him) diifent from Paufania^ ; and which is moft obfervable, PNmer reckons Adraftus, who is the 23 in the account of Africanus^ to be the firft that reigned in Sicyon^ whofe time was after the inftitution of the Olympick game by Felops: of h\m thus Homer, Where Chap. 6. The Truth of Scripture- Hifiory affertect, 89 Whereby he expreHeth Adraftm to be the frft King of Si- cyon ; and not as Scaliger would interpret it, that Adraftus was firft 70';!?^ of the Sicyonians^ before he w^as of the Argives ; for in the time of Adraftm at Sicyon^ either AtreuSy or Thye- ftes w^as King of the Argives : for in the fecond year of Pb^- ftus and Adraftus his fuppofed Predecedor in Sicyon^ Atreus reftoredthe Olympick game of Telops^ in the 41 year of their reign, and they reigned at Argi 65 years; Now that Fha- ftus at Sicyon is fuppofed to reign but eight years ; and therefore the reign of Adraftus ^t Sicyon falls in "with that of Atreus and T'hyeftes at Argi or Mycena, Thus we fee now how uncertain the account of times was before the be- ginning of the Olympiads among the Grecians^ which is fully acknowledged by DiodoruSy and the very reafon given which we here infifl: on, Sia, ix> fjt^S^v ■7ra,^:7r,^yuA Tct^ei^iKp^iycu *?rifi T^Tcov yn^ivQuivov ^ that there was no certainty in the ancient Grecian hiftory^ becaufe they had no certain term ('which he calls parapegma , as others Epocha^ and Cenforinus titulus) from whence to deduce their accounts. But now from the time of the Olympiads (i. e. from the firft of them after their re- ftoration by Iphitus, wherein the names of the Conquerors were ingraven in Erafs tablets for the purpole) the fucceflion of time is moft certain and hiftorical among the Grecians ; by which account we have from thence a certain way of com- menfurating the lacred and prophane Hiftory. All the dif- ficulty is in what year of facred Hiftory the Olympiads began, which Scaliger thus finds out. Cenforinus writes ( m the year of Chrift 238 which was of the Julian period 4951.) that, De emend ter^ip. that year was from the firft Olympiad of Iphiats 10 14, the firft ^- 5- Olympiad was o^thQ Julian period 39 ;8. which was according to our learned Trim ate A, M, 3228, and the ^5 of Vzzlah King of Judahy or the 34 as Capellus thinks ; So that from henceforward we have a clear account of times, which we • have demonftrated to have been fo uncertain before. If we come from the Greeks further into thefe European Seel. 4. parts, we ftiall find as muchdarknefs and obfcurity as to an-, cient times, if not more, than in thofe already di'fcourfed of. For the truth is, the account of times before the Romans in Italy, Germany^ old Gallia or Britain, are fcarce fit to be difj cotirfed of under any head than that of impoftures. Not N that JO Ortgtnes Sacra : Book I. that I think thofe Nations had lain in a perpetual deep till the Roma)25 waked them into fome kind of civility, but that they had no certain way of conveying down the tranfadlions of their own and former times to the view of pofterity. On which account we may juftly rejedt ' all thofe pretended fuc- ceflions of Kings here in Britain from Corner and Brute as fa- bulous : And it will be the lefs wonder it (liould be fo in thofe then accounted barbarous Nations, when even among thofe who were the Planters of knowledge and civility among others, the account of their ancient times is fo dark, confu- fed, and uncertain : As it would fufficiently appear to any that would take the pains to examine the fucceflion of the t^ofirft Bynajlics among the Latines ; the firft before c^/»^/m his coming into /r^/y^and the lecond of th^i^nead^ after ; and certainly it will be fufficient ground to queflion the account of times before, if in the third Dynafty^ when the fucceffion feems fo clear, and fo certain an Epocha as the building of Rome, to deduce their accounts from their Chronology be un* certain, which I Ihall briefly fpeak to. For although Vorcius Cato have in Dionyfius the honour of finding out the firft Talilia of the City of Rome (which was the Feaft obferved to the honour of the Goddefs Vales., in the time of which, the foundations of Rome were laid) yet there appears no great cer- tainty in his undertaking ; for therein he was after contradi- fted by the learned Roman Varro, Dionyfius tells us that Cata found by the Cenfors tables the exact time from the expulfion of the Kings, to the time of the Cities being taking by the Gculs ; from which time to his own, he could not mifs of it from the Fafti Confulares ; fo that it cannot be denied but , that Cato might have a certain account of times from the Re- gifugium to the time he writ his Origines. But what certainty Cato could have from the firft P^/i/ij of the City to the expulfi- en of Tarquin.w^Q cannot underftand. For the fucceflion of Kings muft needs be very uncertain, unlefs it be demonftrated from fome publick monuments, or certain records, or fbme publick a ftions certainly known to have fallen out precifely in fuch a year of their feveral Reigns. Now none of thefe do occur in the Roman Hiftory, in all that Interval from the Palilia to the Regifiigiiim > fo that not only the wiiole interval, but the time of every particular Kings Reign, are very -uncertain. And therefore Chap. 6, The Truth of Scrtpture-Hiflory ajferted. 9 1 therefore Varro being deftitute of any demonftration of that time, had recourfe to L.Tarrutius Firmanus^ to fee if by his skill in Aftronomy he could certainly find out the firft Voli- Ha of Rome : His anfwer was, that he found that the City was built in the time of an EcHpfe of the Sun^whkh was in the ;d year of the fixth Olympiad-^ according to which account Varro proceeded, and thence arofe the difference between the Palilia Catoniana^ndiVarromana 5 the latter faUingout in the 23 of Iphitus^ the other in the 24. But if we believe Jofeph Scali- ^ ^-' £>;».-»/ ^fr,there could not be an Eclipfe of thc5«;?, at the time affirm- ^^»^^^•5^388= ed by Tarrutius : But yet granting an Eclipfe of the Sun then, w^hat certainty can we have of the fucceffion of the fcveraliC/^Tg;/ afterwards, without which there can be no certain computa- tion ah Vrbe condita ? If then the Romans^ who had ^b great advantage of knowing times, and were withal ib inquifitive concerning the building of their City (which was a thing of no very remote diftance) could attain to no ablblute certainty without it, what certainty can we expedt as to an account of far ancienter times, either from them or others, w^hen they had no Cenfors tables^ nor Fafti Confuidres to be guided by f And thus much may ferve to fliew the great uncertainty 0^ Hea- then Chronology y as to the giving an account of ancient times. And yet were it only an uncertainty as to Chronology -^ we SeB, y. might better bear with it ; for the miftake meerly in compu- tation of times were Rot fo dangerous (any further than the credibility of the Hiftory depends on the computation, as in point of antiquity) if we were but certain that the perfons and adions related of them were fuch as they are reported to be. But that which adds much to the confufwn and uncertain- ty of heathen hiftory^ is, the frequency of Impoftures^ which arc more hard to be difcovered, in that there are no authentick Hiflories of tho(e times extant, which hath both given occa- fion to variety ot impoftures, and much hindred their difco- very. For the • curiofity of men leading them back into a, fearch after ancient times, it makes them exceeding credu- lous in embracing whatever pretends to give them any condu(fl through thofe dark and obfcure paths of ancient Hiftory ; And the world hath never been wanting of fuch as would be ready to abufe the fimple credulity of well-meaning, but lefs wary men 5 but thofe ages have h^tn'mo^iferaciom in the pra^ N 2 diiiiion $z Orighes Sacra : Book I. duBion of fuch perfons, which have pretended to more Lear- ning than they had. The pretence of Learning made fuch per- Ibns appear, and the want of it made them not be difcovered. Thus it was not only of old among the thaldean md^/£gyptia/f Frkfis^znd the Grecian Foets and Hiftorians. of whom we have Ipoken already ; but even among thole who might hare learned more truth from the Religion they profefled, than tO' think it flood in need of their lyes. For there cau be no greater difparagement offered to truth, than to defend it with any thing but it felf, nothing laying truth fo open to fufpicion, as when fallliood comes to be its advocate: And a falfe teftimony difcovered, doth more prejudice to a good caufe, than it could any ways advantage it, were it not difcovered ; and therefore their labours have been as ferviceable to the world who havedif^ covered Impofiuresy as thofe who have diredly maintained truth againft its open oppolers, thofe being fo much more dangerous, in that they appear in the difguife of truth, and therefore are. with more difficulty difcovered. Such a one was that igm fatms that appeared in a kind of twilight in the Chriftian world be- tween the former darkneTs of Barbarifm^ and the approaching light o{ knowledge -, I mean Annius Fiterbienfis, who like Hanni- hal in paffing the JlpSy not finding a way ready to his mind, lets himfelf to burning the woods, and firing the rocks, and diflbl- ving them with vinegar to make a paffage through them : So Annius being befet in thofe fnowy and gray-headed Alps of an- - cient hiftory,and finding noway clear for him according to his fancy, he labours to burn down all certain Records ^to eat through the credit of undoubted Authors, to make a more free paifage from his own hiftory, which he deducefeh fuitably to Scripture for the concurrent teftimony of the eldeft Hiftorians. To which purpofe, a New Berofus^Manetho^Philo^Metafthenes (as he rniftook for Megafthems) and Xenophon muft put on a grave dif^ guife, and walk abroad the world with 3. mantle of Antiquity a- bout their fhoulders, although they were nothing el(e but airy Thantafms^ covered over with the Cowl of the Monk of F/Yf r^^. For being hi mfelffomewhat more verfedinthe hiftory ofthofe elder times than generally perfons were in the age he lived in, he made that unhappy ufe of his skill,to play the Mountebankmth his learning jand to abufe the credulity of thofe who havebetter ftomachs than palates^ and can fooner fwallow down the compofu tions % Chap. 6. The Truth of Scripture- Hiflory ajferted. ^^ tions that are given them, than find out the Ingredients of them. Thus Annim puts a good face on his new-old /i/ C§3C?b ^ ^ Cl3 CWp C^P C;r3 C^ BOOK IL CHAP. L The certainty of the Writings of Mofes,' In order to the pro'uing the truth of Scripture- hijtory, feveral Hypcthefes laid down. The firfi concerns the reafonahlenefs of prefer'ving the ancient Htfiory of the world in fome cer- tain Records J from the importance of the things^ and the incon'vemencies of meer Tradition or confiant Revelation, The fecond concerns the certainty that the Records under Mofes hu name^ were undoubtedly his. The certainty of a matter of faB enquired into in general ^ and proved as to this particular by unrverfal Confent^ and fettling a Com- mon-weahh upon his Laws. The impojfibility of anlmpofior as to the Writings of Mofes demonfirated. The fleas to the contrary largely anfwered. HAVING fiifficiently demonftrated the want of Se6t. r. credibility in the account of the ancient times, gi- ven by thofe Nations who have made the greatefl pretence to Learning and Antt^mty in the world, we now proceed to evince the credthiluy and certamty of that account which is given us in facred Scriptures : In order to which I (hall prcmife thefe following Hypothefes, Jt ftands to the greatefl reafcn, that an account of things fo tjf, i concerning and remarkable^ jhoidld net ie always left to the uncertainty of an oral Tradition ; but fljculd be timJy entred into certain Records, to be prtferved to the memory of poftcrity. For it being of concernment to the world, in order to the Eftabliflimcnt of belief as to future tilings, to be fully fetled Ox m I oo Ortghes Sacrcc : Book. II. in the belief that all things pafi were managed hy Divine Pro-^ 'vidence^ there muft be Ibme certain Records of former Ages, or elfe the mind of Man will be perpetually hoovering in the greateft uncertainties: Efpecially where there is fuch a mutual dependence ,2iWdi concatenation of one thing with another, as there is in all the Scriptyre-hiftory. For take away but any one of the main Foundations of the Mofaical hifiory^ all the SuperfiruBure will be exceedingly weakned, if it doth not fall quite to the ground. For Man's obligation to obedience un- to God, doth necelfarily fuppofe his original to be from him ; his hearkning to any propofals o{ favour from God, doth fup- pofe his Apofiafa zndfall ; God's deftgning to (hew mercy and favour to fallen Man, doth fuppoie that there muft be fome way whereby the Great Creator muft reveal himfelf as to the Conditions on which fallen Man may expe(fl: a recovery ; the revealing of thcfe Conditions ' in fuch a way whereon a fufpi- cious (bccau(e^«//ir;) cr^^^wre may firmly rely, doth iiippofe ^Q certain a recording of them, as may be leaft liable to any fulpicion of impofture or deceit. For although nothing ellc be in it felf neceflary from God to Man^ in order to his Salva- tion, but the bare revealing in a certain way the Terms on which he muft expedl it ; yet confidering the unbounded Na- ture of Divine Good?iefs^ refpeding not only the good of fonie particular Perfons, but of the whole Society of mankind^ it ftands to the greateft reafon that fuch a Revelation fhould be fb propounded, as might be with equal certainty conveyed to the community of mankind. Which could not with any fuch evidence of credibility be done by private and particular Re^ relations (which give fatisfaftion only to the inward Senfes €)f the partakers of them) as by a publick recording of the matters of Divine Revelation by fuch a Verfon who is enabled to give the world all reafonahle fattsfaclion, that what he did was not of any private defign of his own head •, but that he was deputed to it by no lefs than Divine Authority. And therefore it ftands to the higheft reafon, that where Divine Revelation is necejjary for the certain requiring of Aj/enty the matter to be believed ftiould have a certain uniform- convey^ ance to Mens minds, rather than that perpetually New Reve- lations fliould be required for the making known of thofe things J which being onge recordedy are not liable to fo many; impofiures Chap. I. the Truth of Scripture- Htflory averted, loi impofiures as the other way might have been under pretended Revelations. For then Men are not put to a continual Trial, of every Perfbn pretending Divine Revelation, as to the evi- dences which he brings of Divine Authortty^ but the great matters of concernment being already recorded and attefted by all rational evidencezs to the truth of the things, their minds therein reft fatisfied without being under-a ccntijmal hsjitancy^ left the Revelation of one ftiould contradiB another. For fuppofing that God had left the matters of Divine Re- SeH, 2. velation unrecorded at all, but left them to be difcovered in every Age by zfprit of prophecy, by fuch a multitude as might be fufficient to inform the world of the truth of the things ; we cannot but conceive that an innumerable Company of croaking Enthuftafts would be continually pretending Com- mijfions from Heaven, by which the minds of Men would be left in continual difiraBion, becaufe they would have no cer- tain infallible rules given them, whereby to difference the good and evil fpirit from each other. But now luppofing God . to infpire Ibme particular Perfons, not only to reveal y but to record Divine Truths j then whatever evidences can be brought attefting a Divine Revelation in them, will likewife prove the undoubted certainty and infalltbtlity of thole writings, it being impoftible that Perfons employed by a God of truth fhould make it their defign to impofe upon the world ; which gives us a rational account, why the wife God did not fuffer Xht Htfhry of the world to lie ftill unrecorded, but made choice of fuch d.perfon to record it, who gave abundant evi- dence to the world that he a^ted no private defign, but was peculiarly employed by God himfelf for the doing of it, as will appear afterwards. Befides, we find by our former Dif^ courfe, how liable the moft certain Tradition is to be cor- rupted in progrefs of time, where there are no ftanding Re- cords, though it were at firft delivered by Perfons of un- doubted credit. For we have no reafbn to doubt, but that the Tradition of the old fVorldythQfood and the confecfuences of it, with the nature and worjhip of the true God, were at firft fpread over the greateft part of the world in its firft Plantations ; yet we fee how foon for want of certain con- veyance, all the ancient Tradition was corrupted and abufed in- to the greateft Idolatry.. Which might be lefs wondered at, . , ' had ibx dr/ghws Sacr^ : Book. It had it been only in thofe parts which were fur theft remote from the feat of thofe grand Tranfadions j but thus we find it was even among thofe families who had the neareft refi- dence to the place of them, and among tho(e Perfons who were not far oiT in a lineal defcent from the Perfons mainly concerned in them j as is moft evident in the family out of which Abraham came (who was himfelf the tenth from Jolh. 24. 2. jy^^/^^ y^j. Q^ xhtxn it is faid, th^t they ferved other Gods, How iinHkely then was it, that this Tradition (hould be. af- terwards pi'eierved entire, when the People God had pecu- liarly chofen to himfelf, were fo mixed among the tABgyf- tians^ and lb prone to the Idolatrits of the Nations round about them, and that even after God had given them a writ- ten Law attep^ed with the greateft miracles ? what would they have done then, had they never been brought forth of 'iy^gypt by fuch [igns and wonders^ and had no certain Re- cords left to preierve the Memory of former Ages ? Thus we fee how much it ftands to the greateft reaibn, that ib memorable things (hould be digeftcd into (acred Records. Se5l. % . ^''^ haz/e as great certainty that Mofes n^as the Author of Hyp. 2. the Records going under his name^as we can have fif any mat^ ter of faB done at fo' great a dtfiance of time from m Wc are to confider that there are two very diftin^fl Queftions to be thought of concerning a Divine Revelation to any Perr ibn at a confiderable diftance of time from us ; and thole are "what evidences can he given that the matters recorded are of a true divine revelation ; and what evidence we have qf the truth of the matter of fa5l'^ that fuch things were recorded by fuch perfons. They who do not carefully diftinguifti between thele two Queftions, will foon run thcmfelves into an in- extricable Labyrinth, v/hen they either feek to underftand themfelves, or explain to others the grounds on which they believe the Scriptures to be the IVord of God. The firft ftep in order to which muft be the proving the undoubted certain- ty of the matter of faU^ or the truth of the Hiftory, that fuch perfons were really exiftent, and did either do or record the things we fpeak of : After this, fucceeds the other to prove, not only the real exi fence of the things, but that the perfons who recorded the things, were ajfifted by an infallible spirit ; then there can be no reafon at all to doubt,, but thofe records are Chap. I. The Truth of Scripture-Hijlory afferted. iCj arc the Word of God. The firft of thefc, is, that which at prefent we enquire after, the certainty of the matter of fa£t, that the Records under the name of Mofes were un- doubtedly his. And iiere it will be moft unreafbnable for any to feek for further evidince and demonfiration of it, than the rvjatter to be proved is capable of But if they fhould, I fuppofe we have fufficient reafbn to demonftrate the folly of fuch a demand, and that on thele accounts. 1. Whoever yet undertook to bring matters of faB ^ into Mathematical demonjlratknsy or thought he had ground to queftion the certainty of any thing that was not proved in a Mathematical way to him ? who would ever undertake to prove that Archimedes was killed at Syracufe by any of the demon ftrations he «was then about ? or that Euclide was the undoubted Author of the Geometry under his name ? or do men queftion thefe things for want of fuch demon jvradom ? Yet this is all we at prelent defire, but the fame liberty here tvhich is ufed in any thing of a like nature. ■ 2. I demand of the per [on who denies this moral certainty 2, to h^fujfictent for an affent^ whether he doth queftion every thing in the world, which he was not prefent at the doing of himfelf ? If he be peremptorily relblved to beUeve nothing but what he fees^ he is fit for nothing but a Voyage to Anti- cyra^ or to befoundly purged with Htlkhore to free him from thofe cloudy -humours that make him fufpect the whole world to be an impofiure. But we cannot fuppofe any man fo de- ftitute of reafon, as to queftion the truth of every matter of fa P Well, ic6 Origines Sacro! : Book. II. Seci:. J. Well, but if we fhould ih^'^o^t the whole J ewiflj Nation partial to themfelves^ and that out of honour to the memory of fo great aprfon /jy Moles, thejjhould attribute their ancient Laws and Records to him: Which is all that Infidelity its lelf can imagine in this.Cale j Yet this cannot be with any flia- dow of realbn pretended. For, I. I. Who were thofe per/owj, who did give out this Law to thtjewj under Mofes his name? Certainly they, who undertake to contradi^ that which is received by common confent^ muft bring ftronger and clearer evidence than that on which that content is grounded ; or elle their exceptions deferve to be re- ■ )e(n:ed with the higheft indignation. What proof can be then brought , that not only the Jewtjh Nation^ but the whole Chnftian world, hath been ib lamentably befooled to believe thofe things with an undoubted aflent, which arc on- ly the contrivances of fome cunning men ? 2. 2. At what time could thele things be contrived ? Either while the memory of Adofes and his adions were remaining^ or afterwards. Firft , how could it poiTibly be, when his memory was remaining ? for then all things were fo fref^ in . their memories^ that it was impojpble a thing of this univerlal nature could be forged of him. If after^ then I demand, whether the people had obferved the Laii^ of Mofes before or no ? if noty then they muft certainly know it at the time of its promulgation to be counterfeit ; for had it been from Mofesy it would have been obferved before their times ; if it 'Was cbfer'ved before, then either continually down from the time oiF Mofer, or not ? If continually down, then it Vv'as of Mofes his doing, if we fuppofe him, to have had that Autho- rity among the people which the objetlion fuppofeth ; if net^ then ft] 11 the neurer Mofes his time, the more difficult fucha counterfeiting cr"h.l be \ becaufe the Confiitutiovs which Mo- fes had left among them, would have remaiped in their me- mories ^ whereby they would eafily rejeft -dW pretence s^nd. coun- terfeits. 3. How can we conceive the Nation of the Jeji's would have ever embraced fuch ^Law, had it not l^en oi Mofes his enacting among them in that ftate of time when he did ? For then the people v;ere in fitteft capacity to receive a Law^ being grown a great people^ and therefore necejjary to have Laws j :> chap. I, the truth of Scripture-Hiflory aJferteJ. 107 Zaws'j newly delivered from bondage^ and therefore wanting Laws of their own ; ajjd entr'mg into a fetled ft ate of Com-^ monwealthjWhkh was the moft ^vop^r feafon of giving Laws, Thefe confiderations make it fo clear, that itisalmoft impojji" Se^. 6. bkj to conceive the Nation of the Jews could have their Laws given to them but at the time of their being in the mldernefs^ before they were fetled in Canaan, For fuppofe we at prefent, to gratifie fo far the ohjeBion^ that thefe Laws were brought forth long after the conftitution of the govern^- ment and the national fettlement, under Mofes his name ; how improbable^ nay how impoffible is it to alter the fundamental Laws of a Nation after long fettlement ? what confufion of in- terefts doth this bring ? what difturbance among all forts of people^ who muft be dijfeifed of their rightSy and brought to luch ftrange unwonted cuftoms fb feemingly againft their in^ terefts^ as many of the Conftitutions among the Jews were ? For can we imagine, that a people always devoted to their own interefty would after, it had been quietly fetled in their Land, by Conftitutions after the cuftom of other Nations, prefently under a pretence of a copy of Laws found (that were pretended to be given by one in former Ages of great efteem, called Mofes) throw open all their former inclofures^ and part with their former Laws^ for thefe of which they have no evidence^ but the words of thofe that told it them ? We have a clear inftance for this among the Romans ; al- though tliere were great evidence given of* the undoubted cer- tainty ^ that the Books found in Numd% grave by Petilius were ^/V,yet becaufe they were adjudged by the Senate to be againft the prefent Laws^ they were without further enquiry adjudged to be burnt. Was not here the greateft likelihood that might be, that thefe (hould have taken place among the Mo- manSy for the great veneration for wifdom which Numa was in among them, and the great evidence that thefe were certain remainders of his, wherein he gave a true account of xhtfu- perftitions in ufe among them ? yet left thQ ftate (hould be m- fetled by it, they were prohibited fb much as a publick view^ when the Prator had fworn they were againft the eftablifhed Laws. Can we then conceive the Jewifh Nation would have embraced fo burdenfome and ceremonious a Law as Mofes\ was, had it been brought among them in fuch a way as thQ Books P 2 of io8 Of igines Sacra : Book 11. of Niima, though with all imaginable evidence^ that it was undoubtedly his, efpeei^ly when they were engaged to the ob- fervation of fome Laws or Cuftoms already, by which their Commonwealth hsidi been eftabliihed ? And withall thefe Z^r:p/ of Mofes Teeming fo much again ft the inter eft and good hus- bandry o^ a Nation, as all the neighbour Nations thought, who for that accufed them to be an idle and /loathful people, as they judged by their refting wholly one day in [even, the great and many folemn feafts they had, the repairing of all the males to Je- rufalem thrice a year ; the Sabbatical years ^years of Jubilee, ^c Thele things were apparently againft the intereft of fuch a Nation, whoie great fubfiftence was upon pafturage and agri- culture. So that it is evident thefe Laws refpedted not the mtward intereft of the Nation, and ^o could not be the con- trivance of any Politicians among them, but did immediately aim at the honor of the God whom they ferved, for whom they were to part even with their civil interefts : The doing of which by a people generally taken notice of for a particular Love of their own concernments ^\s an impregnable argument Xh^^t Laws could not take place among them, had they not been given by Mofes at the time of their unfettlement, and that their future fettlement did depend upon their prefent obferva- tion of them ^ which is an evidence too that they could be of no lefs that divine original : Which was more than I was to prove at prefent. SeB 7. 4* Were not thefe writings undoubtedly Mofes^s ; whence Ihould the neighbour Nations about the Jews notwith- ftanding the hatred of the Jewijh Religion, retain fb venerable an opinion of the wifdom of Mofes ? The t^gyptians account ted him one of their Priefts (which notes the efteem they had of his learning) as appears by the teftimonies produced c.y^pp.L i.Bib. out of Chare won and Manetho by Jofephus. Diodorus Siculus % )\dr'^^' ^^ ^P^^^^s of him with great refpeB ^mong the hmous Legijlatours, ^^ ^^"' and fo doth Strabo, who fpeaks in commendation of the Re- ligion eftabliilied by him. Thetcftimonyof Z^^/^/^^jisfuffici- ently known,that Mofes wa^no man of any vulgar wit (^k q tj'^v livn^ Chalcidius calls him fapientiffimus Mofes (although I muft not diifemble that Chalcidius hath been, I think, unde- lervedly reckoned among heathen writers, though he comments on Plato\ Timaus^ it being molt probable that he was a Chri- ftian Chap. I. the truth of Scripture-Hiflory ajferted, 109 ftianVlatmft^ which might more probably make i^animsQ2i\\ ^- ^^/ ^^/^o/- him circumforaneum blateronem) but though we exempt CW-^*^* '^^ '^^^ cidtMsoutof the number of- thoCQ Heathens^ who have born teftimony to the wifdom of MofeSy^ yet there are number e- nough befides him produced by Jufiin Martyr, Cyril , and others, whofe evidence is clear and full to make us undoubt- ^^T7'?^ ^* edly believe, that there could never have been fo miverfal /^^ and uninterrupted a tradition concerning the writings and Laws .of Mofes, had they not been ceitainly his, and conveyed down in a -continual fucceflion from his time to our prefent age. Which will be yet more clear, if we confider in the iecond place, that the national Conftitution and fettlement of the Jews, did depend on the truth of the Laws and Writings of Moies. Can we have more undoubted evidence, that there were fuch perfbns as Solon, L^ycurgus, and Numa, and that the Laws bearing their nam.cs were theirs, than the Hiftory of the feveral Commonwealths of Athens, Sparta, and Rome, who were governed by thofe Laws^ When writings are not of ge- neral concernment, they may be more eafily counterfeited ; but when they concern the rights, privileges, and government of a Nation, there will be enough whole inter eji will lead them to prevent impoftures. It is no eafie matter to forge a Magna Charta, and to invent Laws ; mens caution and prudence is never to quick- fight ed as in matters which concern their eftates znd freeholds. Th^ general inter eji of men lies contrary to fuch impoftures, and therefore they will prevent their obtaining among them. Now the Laws of Mofes are incorporated into the very Republick of the. Jews, and their fubfiftence and Go- vernment depends upon them, their Religion and Laws are fo interwoven one with the other, that one cannot be broken off from the other. Their right to their temporal pofeffions in the land of Canaan depends on their owning the Sovereignty of God who gave them to them ; and on the truth of the Hifiory recorded by Mofes concerning the promifes made to the Patriarchs. So that on that account it was impoffiblc thofe Laws fliould be counterfeit on which the welfare of a Nation depended, and according to which they were governed ever fince they were a Nation. So that I (hall now take it to be fufficiently proved, that the writings under the name of Mofes were urJoubtedly his j for none, who acknowledge the the Larvs to have been his, can have the face to deny the Hiftory , there being fo neceflary a connexion between them ; and the book of Genefis being nothing elfe but a gene- ral and very neceflary introduBion to that which follows. I deny not but the hiftory of Mofes might, according to the tradition of the Jews^ and the belief oi others, be reviled by Bzra^ or the men of the great Synagogue after the Jews re- turn from captivity, as appears by the names of places^ and other paflages not iiiitable to the time of Mofes ; but I utterly deny that the Pentateuch w^as notof JW^/^/his penning,or thatit was only a ColletHon out of the Diaries and Annals of the Nation : For throughout the Scripture the very hiftorical pai^ fagcs are attributed to Mofes, and in all probability the Sa-^ mar it an Pentateuch bears date before the Captivity^ by which it ftill appears that thofc Books are truly the Books of Mojes, CHAP. Chap. 2. The Truth of Scripture- Hiflory ajferted. in CHAP. II. Mofes his certain knowledge of what he writ. The, third Hypothefis concerns the certainty of the matter of Mo- fes his Hiftcry ; that gradually proved : Firfi, Mofes his knowledge cleared^ by his education^ and experience ^ and cer- tain information. His education in the wifdom of iEgypt ; what that was. The old Egyptian learning enquired into ; the conveniences for it. Of the Egyptian Friefts. Mofes reckoned among them for his knowledge. The Mathematical^ Natural^ Divine^ and Moral learning of -^gypt : their Po^ litical wifdom moft confiderahle. The advantage of -Moles above the Gre^k L'hilofphers^ a^ to wifdom and reafon, Mo- fes himfelf an eye-witnefs of mofi of his hifiory : the certain -uninterrupted tradition of the other part among the Jews^ ma^ nifefied by rational evidence, m HAving thus far cleared our way, w^e come to the third Hypothefis, which is. There areas manifefi proofs of the ^^^^' ^' ■ undoubted truth and certainty of the Hifiory recorded /^y Mofes, ^^^' ^* as any can be given concerning any thing which we yield ths firm- efi ajfent unto. Here it muft beconfidered, that we proceed in a way of rational evidence to prove the truth of the thing in hand, as to which, if in the judgment of impartial perfons the arguments produced be ftrong enough to convince an un- byaifed mind 5 It is not material, whether every wrangling jktheifi will fit down contented with them. For ufually per- fons of that inclination rather than judgment^ are more re- fblved againfi: light, than inquifitive after it, and rather feek to ftop the chinks at which any light might come in than open the windows for the free andchearful entertainment of it. It will certainly be fjfficient to make it appear, that no man can '^ deny the truth of that part of Scripture which we are now fpeaking of, without offering manifefi violence to his own fa- culties, and making it appear to the world, that he is one wholly forfaken of his own reafon : which will be fatisfadorily done, if we can clear thefe things : Firfi, that it was morally impoffible Moks fhould be ignorant of the things he undertook to ' write . 1 1 ^ Origirtes Sacrct : Book. II, 7vrke of, and fo he deaived himfelf. Secondly, "That it 7vas utterly tmfojjible he (Jwuld have any dejign in deceiving others in reporting it. Thirdly, That it ts certain from all rational evi- dence, that he hath not deceived the world, l>ut that his Hifio- ry PS undoubtedly true. Firft, That it was morally impffihle Mofes pould he deceived him i elf, or he ignorant of the things which he writ of Tivo things are reqaifite to prevent a Man's being deceived himfelf. Firft, That he he a ferfon of more than ordinary judgment, wifdom, and knowledge. Secondly^ That he have fufficient information concerning the things he un- dertakes to 7vrite of If either of thefe two be wanting, it , is poffible for a man of integrity to be deceived ; for an honefi heart hath not ahvays an Unm and Thammim upon it ; nor is fidelity always furni(hed with the acuteft intelleduals. The Jimplicity of the Dove is as liable to be deceived its felf as the fuhtilty of the Serpent is to deceive others ; but where the wifdom of the Serpent is, to prevent being deceived, and the Doves innocency in not deceiving others, there are all the qualifications can be defired in any one who undertakes only to tell the Truth. Firft, Then that Moles was a perfon of a great underftandmg, and fujpciently qualified to put a difference be- tween truth and faljliood, will appear, firft, from the ingenuity of his Education -, Secondly, from the ripenefs of his judgment y a?jd greatnefs of his experience when he penned thefe things. Fir fir. We begin with his Education: And here we require at prefent no further aflent to be given to what is reported concerning Mofes in Scripture,xh'm what we give to Plutarch's H«b. r 1. 2$. ^^'^^^t 01" ''iny other relations concerning the adions of perfbns Aft. 7. 2 2. who lived in former Ages. Two things then we find recorded in Scripture concerning J^/o/e/ his Education-, that he was brought, up m the Court of . That he was a perfon both con^erfant in civil Affairs, and acquainted with ^.the abftrufer parts of all the y£gyptians\v^s fuch as might be fuppofed to improve the reafon and underftanding of men to fuch an height, as there- by to make them more capable of putting a difference between truth and falfhood f Whether it were fuch an overflowing Ni- lus as would enrich the underfiandmgs of all thofe who were in ' a capacity to receive its ftreams ? The truth is, there want not |^ grounds of fufpicion, that the old z^^gyptian Learning was not of that elevation which the prefent diftance of our Age makes us apt to think it was. And a learned man hath in a fet difcourle endeavoured to flicw the great defers that there wer€ in it: Neither can it, I think, bedenyed, but according Conringius de to the reports we have now concerning it, feme farts cf their Cermet. Medic. Learning WQTQ frivolous, others objcure, a great deal Magical, ^' ^^' ii> J^- and the reft jhort of that improvement, which the accefTion of the parts and induftry of after Ages gave unto it. But yet it is again as evident, that fome parts of learning were invented by the Egyptians, others much improved, and that the Greeks did at ViV^i/et up with the ft-ock they borrowed out of t^gypr^ and '.that learning chiefly flourillied there, when there was (I had almoft faid) an ^^gyptian darknefs of Ignorance ovcr- fpreading the face oi Greece as well as other Nations. Q W'hich SatM ji^ Origines Sacra^ : Book If. SqcI. 3. Which will appear bythefe confiderations, the great anti- quity of their repute for Learnings the great adva??tages they had for promoting it, and the parts of Learning mojl in ufe among them. This though it may feem a digrejjion here, will yet tend 10 promoie our defign, by ihewing thereby how quali- fied and acconnplifhed Mofes was to deliver to the world an hiftory of ancient tinaes. If we believe Macrobius, there was no people in the world could vye for Learning with the e^- 'n.I.j.cap.Syp^^^^^^j who makes ,hi.e. 1^. ciplinarnm parenteSy the Fathers of the Philofophick Sciences-^ he derives elfewhere the original of all Jfironomy from them, quos conftat primos omnium ctslum metiri, & fcrutari aufos : though it be mov^robable that, the Nativity even of Ajirono- c^jp.iu my it felf was fivK calculated by the Chaldeans, from whom it was conveyed to the lofo^hy were extruded, and the old a^Egyptian received in- ftead of it. But the world is now grown wifer, than to re- ceive his Hermes Trifmegifius for the Author of the old t^- gyptian Fhilofophy, the credit of his Author being for ever bla- fled, and the dodrine contained in the Books under his name, manifefted to be ameer 'Cento, a confufcd mixture of the Chri- fiian, Vlatonick, and ^yEgyptian dodrine together. So that we could hardly maintain the juflnels of the repute of the anci- tnt Egyptian Learning frormny thing now extant of it ; but yet we fee no reafbn to queftion it, efpecially fince it is fb ho- nourably fpoken of in Sacred writ ^ and feems in it to have been chap. ^^ The Truth of Scripture- Hijlory ajferte J. Xl^ been vmdQ th^ fiandard ^nd meafure of huimnt mfdorn. For which we have this obfervable teilimony,that when the wifdom of Solomon is fpoken of with the greatefl advantage and com- mendation, it is fet forth with this character, rto it exceed- ed the wifdom of all the children of the Eaft Country ^ and all ^ King. 4. if, the wijdom of ^gypt. Whence it is mod natural and ealie 3°'3i' to argue, That certainly their learning rauft be accounted the greateft at that time in the world ; or elfe it could not have been inferred-, that Solomon was wifer than all men, becaule his wifdem excelled theirs, unlefs we fuppofe their wifdom to have been the greatefi in that age of the world, when the wifdom of the Grecians (although in thaftime Homer is fuppofed to flourilh) was not thought worthy the taking notice of. We lee from hence then, as from an irrefragable teftimony, that the ivifdom of the Egyptians anciently was no trivial Pedantry^ nor mctr fuperfiitioHS ^nd Magical rites , but that there w'as ibmething in it folid d.nd fubftantial, or it had not been w^orth triumphing [over by the wifdom of Solomon : It being true of that, what Lipfius faith of the Roman Empire, ^icquid dignum jy t^ ^ -. g vinci videbatur^vicit y cetera non tam non potuit quam contempfit \ Kom.li. c, 5.* -it was an argument of fome great worth, that it was over- topped and conquered by it. . • Thus we fee how juft the repute of the ancient z^gyptian Seel. 4] Learning is from Tefiiniony, and we fhall find as great reafon for it, when we confider the great advantages the ^^gyptians had for promoting of Learning among them. Two ways men come to knowledge, either by tradition from others, or by ob- fervation of their own ; what the i^gyptians had the firfi way, will be fpoken to afterwards; w^e now confiderthe latter ofthefe. All knowledge ariilng from obfervation, muff be either of thofe Sciences which immediately conduce to the benefit of mens lives, or fjch whofe end is to improve mens rational fa- yi^ ^^ip lu^ tulties in the knowledge of -things. The former neceffi.ymW taph. i. ic. i. put men upon the finding out, the latter require fecefum & otia, freedom from other imployments,. a mind addi^ed to them,^ and indufiry in the ftudy of them, and a care to preferve their inventions in them. The ftudy of Geometry among the •Egyptians, owed its original to'neceffity, for the river zYf/^ be- ing fwelled with the (howers falling in Rthiopia. and thence " annually over-flowing the Country of Bgypt, and by its vio- Q ^ lence i^t6 Origines Sacrcc : Book II, knee overturning all the marks they had to diftinguifli their lands, made it necelFary for them upon every abatement of the flood to furvey their Lands, to find out every one his own by the quantity of the ground upon the furvey. The neceffity of VN/hich put them upon a more diligent enquiry into that ftudy, that thereby they might attain to fome exa61nefs in that, which was to be of fuch necelfary, confiant and perpe- tual ufe. Thence we find the invention of Geometry particu- Hero^. 1. 2. larly attributed by Herodotus^ Diodorus, Strata and others , f/rl/. 17 ^^ ^^^ Mgjptians. This skill of theirs they after im- Ccei. Rhodi. I, pi'oved into a greater benefit, viz, the conveying the water of i8. ^. 34. Nile into thofe places whefe it had not overflown to fo great a height, as to give them hopes, of an enfuing plenty j which they did by the artificial cutting of ieveraj Chanels for that end, wherein, faith Strabo, the ^iA^'gyptians Art and In- duftry out'Went Nature it felf. By this likewife they ob- ferved the height of the over-flowing of the river, whereby , they knew what harveft to expeft the following year ; which- they 'did by a Well near Memphis (from the ufe of it called NwAo^^Tf/oj') upon the walls of which were the marks of le- veral cubits , w^hich they obferve and publiQi it to all , that they might provide themfelves accordingly. We fee what grounds there are, even from profit and adi^antage, to make us believe that the /Egyptians were skilled in Geometry^ and the knowledge relating thereto. SeB, y. And for the promoting of all other knowledge whofe end is Contemplation-, the very conftitution of their Commonwealth did much conduce thereto : For thereby it was provided that there flicfuld always be a fufficient number of perfons freed from all other Employments^ who might devote themfelves to a (edulous enquiry into the Natures of things. Such were the JEgyptian Triejis^ who by the peculiar nature of the lEgypti^ an Superfiitions.wKVQ freed from that burdenfome fervice of fa- crifcing beafts^ which the Priefls of other Nations were conti- nually employed about, and (b they enjoyed not only an eafie but a very honour able employment \ for they were the per- ibns of the greateft honour, efteem , and authority among the E.gyptians, of which rank, as far as I can find , all were accounted, who were not Souldiers, Husbandmen, or Ar- Qiozr.l. 17. tifuers, For Strabo mentions no Nobility at all in Mgypt diUma Chap. 1. the Truth of Scripture Hiftory ajfferteJ, ^ ^ 7 diftind from the Trkfts ; for he divides the whole Commonwealth into Souldiers , Husbandmen and Priefts. And telling us that the other two were employed about matters of war, and the Kings revenues in peace y he adds, ei q h^Ci^ «} ^z- Triejis minded the ftudy of Philofophy and Aftronomy , and con- verfed moft with their Kings : And after, fpeaking of their ' Kings being ftudied in their arts as well as others of the Friefis, he adds, fXi^'Sv l2 ctCT^^i; 'Tr^iim o f6iQ-, with whom they [pent mofi of their lives. Agreeable to this, Plutarch tells us , that Deifid.& ofr. the Kings then>felves were often Triejis j and adds , out of Hecatctm^ that the Kings ufed to drink wine by meafure, U.^{i^ %v]ii > becaufe they were Vriefls\ for, as he laith , the Kings of ty£gypt were always chofen, either out of the rank of Priefis or Souldiers , t« /^V =^' etvJ'ei^j t« O ^io. antpicuf ^^^i a^icoixa ;^ 77- lj,[w i-/>v\@- ' thofe two orders being of the greatefi honour^ the one for valour , and the other for wifdom \ and if the King wxre chofen out of the Souldiers , he was prefently entred among the I ri^fisy to learn their my ftical Sciences, Diodorus indeed l^^^ j, feems to reckon forae great perfons after the Friefis^ and di- ftinct from the Souldiery ; but if he means by thefe any other than fome of the chief of the other two profejfions , I muft fay , as Cafaubon doth in another caie of Diodorm , Sane Stra- ^r^^.^ -^^ ^^^^^ bonis auBoritas multls ftculis apudme pr^valet. Diodorus his i. i-j. ■ teftimony is not to be weighed with Strabo'i. From hence we may'underftand the reafon why that Votipherah^ whofe daugh- ter Jofeph married, is called ;nD, which fome render the Pri-eji, Gen. 41. ±$. others the Prince of On ; but thefe two we fee are very conll- ftent, their Priefis being their great Princes \ and Heliopolis , or On ^ of which Potiphcrah was Prince or Prieji, being the 1 chief Seat and Vniverfity of the Priefis of i^gypt. Now it is evident from Clemens Alexandrinus, that the ^Egyptians did strom. I 5. not communicate their myfieries promilcuoufly to all, but on- ly to fuch as were in fuccejfton to the Crown, or elfe to thofe of the Priefis and their Children ^ who were moft apt and fit , for them , both by their diet , infiruciion , and family. For this was unalterably obferved among them , that there was a continued fuccefiton of zprofefifion in their fever al families ^ both of Priefis ^ Souldiers ^ and Husbandmen^ whereby they kept their feveral orders without any mixture or confufion, which is J 'riS Orrgines Sacr^ * Book IT. Horoel. /. r. is confeiTed both by Herodotus and Di odor us : So that by this Diod. l.i.c.ii- conliitutioii Learning was among them confined to the Priejis, which highly advanceth the probabiUty of that tradition^ pre- lerved among the ed the leprous people out oi Seci. I. 'npHE fecond /?r^/7^y?/-/W contains the proof of Mofes his X fidelity ^t hat he was as far from having any -intent to deceive others^ as he w^is being deceived himfelf. Two ways Mofes mull be conlidered, as an Hiftorian^ and as a Lawgiver -^ the on- ly inducement for hitn to deceive as an Hiftorian, muft be Ibme particular intereft which muft draw him afide from an ' impartial delivery of the truth ; as a Law-giver he might de- L I ceive^ if he pretended Divine revelation for thofe Laws which ' '■ were only the iifues of his own brain, that they might be received with a greater veneration among the people, as Numa Pompilim and others did. Now if we prove that Mofes had no intereft to deceive in his Hiftory^ and had all rational evi- dence of Divine revelation in his Laws., we Oiall abundantly e- vince the undoubted fidelity of Mofes in every thing recorded by him. We begin then with h\s fidelity as ^n Hiftorian ; and it being contrary to the common intereft of the world to de- ceive and be deceived ^wc have no reafonto entertain any fufpici- ons Ghap. 3. The Truth of Scripture- Hifiory ajferted, ' 117 ons of the veracity of any perfon wliere we cannot dilcern fome peculiar inter eft that might have a ftronger biafs upon him than the common intereft of the world. For it is other- wife in morals than in naturals -, for in naturals^ we lee that every thing will leave its proper intereft to preferve the com^ mon intereft of nature ; but in morals^ there is nothing more common than deferting the common intereft of mankind, to fet up a peculiar intereft againfi: it : It being the trueft defcrip- tion of a Politician^ that he is one who makes himfelf the centre, and the whole world his circumference ; that he regards not how much the whole world is abufed, if any advantage doth accrue to himfelf by it. Where we fee it then the de- fign of any perfon to advance himfelf or his pofterity, or to fet up the credit of the Nation whofe Hiftory he writes, we may have juft caufe to fufpe^t his partiality, becaule we then find a fufficient inducement for fuch a one to leave the common road of truth, and to fall into the paths of deceit. But we have not the leaft ground to fiifped any fuch 'partiality in the Hiftory of Mofes \ for nothing is more clear than that he was free from the ambitiom defign of advancing himfelf and h\% pofterity, who notwithftanding the great honour he enjoy- ed himfelf, was content to leave his /'^/^^nVj' in the meaneil Ibrt of attendance upon the Tabernacle. And as little have we ground to think he intended to flatter that Nation, which he fo lively defcribeS, that one would think he had rather a ^t^ign to ktiovthlhtfrowardnefs, unbelief, unthankfulnefs^znd difobedience of a Nation towards a Graciom God, than any ways to inhance their reputation in the world, or to ingratiate . himfelf with them by writing this Hiftory of them Nay, and he fets forth fo exadly the leffer failings and grower enormia . ties of all the Anceftours of this Nation whofe ads he records, that any impartial Reader vdll loon acquit him of a defign of flattery, when after he hath recorded tho^^ faults, he feeks not to extenuate them, or bring any excufe or pretence to palliate them. So that any obferving reader may eafily take notice, that he was carried on by a higher defign than the common people 0^ Hi/lorians are ; and that his drift and fcope was to exalt the goodnefs and favour of God, towards a rebellion and ohftinate people. Of which there can be no greater nor more lively demonftration, than the Hiftory oi all the tranfaifions o( the ii8 Origines Sacra : Book II. the Jewish Nation^ from their coming forth of Rgypt to their utter ruine and defolation. And Mofes tells them as Deuc. 7. 7, 8. from God himfelf, it was neither for their number, nor their goodnefsy that God fet his Love upon them, but he loved them^ becaiife he loved them ; /'. e. no other account was to be given of h".s gracious dealing with them, but tht freenefs of his own bounty, and the exuberancy of his goodnefs towards them. Nay, have we not caufe to admire the ingenuity as well as ve- . - racity of this excellent perfonage, who not only lays fb noto- rious a blot upon the flock of his own Family Levi, record- ing fb punctually the inhumanity and cruelty of him, and Si- Gen 'J4 2^ '^^^^ ^^ their dealings with the Sechcmites , but likewife in- Gcn. 49.' 5,6,7. ^I'ts that curfe which was left upon their memory for it, by their own Father at his deceafe! And that he might not leave the k?i{{fufpicion 0^ partiality heh\wd him, he hath not done as thQ ftatuary did, (who engraved his own name fo artifici- ally in the flatue of Jupiter, that one fliould continue as long as the other, (but what the other intended for the praife of his skill, Mofes hath done for his ingenuity, that he hath fb interwoven the Hijiory of his own failings and difobedience with thofe of the Nation, that his j^o^i are hkc to continue as long as the whole web of his Hiftory is like to do. Had it been the lead part of his defign to have his memory prefcr- ved with ^fuperfiitiom veneration among the Jews, how eafie had it been for him, to have left (TUt any thing that might in the Icaft entrench upon his reputation ? but we find him very fecure and carekfs in that particular} nay, on the other ?At, very Jludims and indujirious in deprejjing the ho- nour and deferts of men and advancing the power and gaoJ- nefs of God. And all this he doth, not in an affeded y?r^/« of Methorick, whofe proper work is iwpetrare fdem mendacio, and as Tally fomewhere confeifeth, to make things feem otherwife than they are, but with that innate fimpUcity cindplainnefs,^ud yet wirhal with that Imperatoria brevitas, that Majefty and Authority^ that it is thereby evident he lough t not to court accept an:e, but to demand belief : Nor had any fuch pitiful de- fign of plcafing hisReidcrs with fbme affe^ed phrafes , but thought that Truth it fclf had prefefjce enough with it, to com- jnand the fubmijfwn of our under /landings to it. Efpecially chap. 3. The Truth of Scrtpture-Hijlory afferted. 129 Efpecially when all thefe were delivered by fuch a one who S^'^, 2, came fufficiently armed with ail motives of credibility and . inducements to ajfent^ by that evidence which he gave, that he • was no pretender to divine revelation^ but was hally imployed as z peculiar inftrument of State under the God and Ruler of the whole world. Which if it be made clear, than all our further doubts muft prefently ceafe, and all impertinent difputes be filenced, when the fupream Majefty appears impowering any ' perfon tx) dictate to the world the Laws they muft be go- verned by. For if any thing be repugnant to our rational faculties^ that is^ that God fhould dittate any thing but what is moft certainly true^ or that the G^vernour of the world (hould prefcri be ^r\y Laws, but fuch as were mod jufi zndreafonableJfvjQ ilippofe a God^ we cannot queftion veracity to be one of his chiefeft Attributes, and that it is impoffible the God of truth Ihould imploy any, to reveal any thing as from him, but what vfds undoubtedly true. So that it were an argument of the moft grofs and unrealbnable incredulity, to difirufi the certainty of any thing which comes to us with fufficient evidence of divine revelation, becaufe thereby we (hew our diftruft of the veracity of God himfelf. All that we can defire then, is only reafonabh fatisfaBion concerning the evidence of Divine revelation in the perfon whofe words we are to credit,and this our Graciom God hath been fo far from denying men, that he hath given all rational evidence of the truth of it. For it implying no in- congruity at all, to any notions of God or our [elves, that God Iboiald, when it pleafes him, fingle out fome infirument to manifcft his will to the world -, our enquiry then leads us to thofe things which may be proper notes and characters of fuch a perfon who is employed on fo high an Embajfy. And thofe . are chiefly thefe two, if his actions be fuch a^ could not flow from the power of meer natural caufes -, and if the things he re- veals be fuch cu> co-uld not proceed from my created under ftunding. Firft then, for his anions, thefe ft-riking moft upon our out- ward fenfes, when they are any thing extraordinary, do tranf- mit along with the impreffions of them to the underftanding, an high opinion of th^ perfon that does them : Whereas the mere height of knowledge, or profoundnefs of things difcovered, can J^ve no fuch prefent power and influeiice upon any, but fuch Ware of more r^//?^ and inquifitive yninds. And the world S is TjO Origtnes^ Smr^ : . Book 11. is generally more apt to fufpeft its felf deceived with words^ than it can be with anions ; and hence Miracles^ or the doing of things above the reach of nature, hath been always em- braced as the greateft teftimony of Divine authority and revela- tion. For which there is this evident reafbn,That the courfe of nature being fetled by divine power, and every thing a(ft- ing there by the force of that power it received at firft, it feems impoffible that any thing (hould really alter thtferies of things, without the fame power which at firft produced them. This then we take for granted,^/;^/- where-ever fmh a power ap- pears ^ there is a certain evidence of a Divine pre fence going along with fuch a perfon who enjoys it. And this is that which is moft evident in the atlions of Mofes, both as to the Miracles he wrought both in inducements to ^or confirmations of our faith ^ concerning the Di- vine imployment of any perfons in the world. And here I lay down this as a certain Foundation, That a power of miraclej is nW conflantly chap. 3 . The Truth of Scripture- Hiflory ajferted. 1 3 1 conjlantly and perpetually mcefary in all thofe who manage the affairs of Heaven here on earthy or that aciin the name of God in the world. When the doctrine oi faith is once fetkd in facred records, and the divine revelation of that docfrine fufficiently ■ attejled^ by a power of miracles in the revealers of it, What imaginable neceffity or pretext can there be contrived for a power of miracles, efpecially among fuch as already own the Divine revelation of the Scriptures f To make then a power of working miracles to be conftantly refident in the Church of God, as one of the necelTary notes and charaBers of it^ is to put God UQpn that neceffity which common nature is freed from, viz. of pultiplying things without fufficient caufe to be given for them ; and to leave mens faith at a ftand, when God hath given fufficient teftimony for it to rely upon. It is a thing too common and eafie to be obferved, that Ibme per- fons out of their eagernefs to uphold the intereft of their own party, have been fain to eftablilh it upon fuch grounds, which when they are fufficiently fearched to the bottom, do apparently undermine the common and fure Foundations whereon the belief of our common Chrifiianity doth m.ainly ftand. It were eafie to make a large difcourfe on this fub- jcd:, whereby we may rip open the wounds that Chrifiianity hath receivedjthrough the contentions of the feveral parties of it ; but this imputation cannot with fo much realbn be fadned on any party, as that which is nailed to a pretended infallible chair ; for which we need no other inftance, than this before us. For while the leaders of that party make zpower of mi- racles to be a necelTary note of the true Churchy they unavoida- bly run men upon this dangerous precipice, not to believe any thing as a matter of faith, where they find not fufficient mi- racles to convince them that is the true Church which pro- pounds it to them. Which neceflarily follows from their ac- knowledged principles ; for it being im.pofiible, according to them, to believe any thing with ?i divine faith ^ but what is propounded by the Church as an infallible guide ; and it being impoffible to know which is this infallible guide, but by the notes and charaBers of it, and one of thofe ?2otes^ being a . - power of miracles y I cannot find out m^ guide hvx by th\^ pow- er ; and this power muft h^prefent in the Church, (for nothing ef former ages' concerning faith, as the Miracles of Chrifi^ Si his i^z Origines Sacra : Book IT. his refurreBion^ &c. is to be believed, but on the Church's account) and therefore where men do not find fufficient con- viSi-ion from prefent miracles ^ to believe the Church to be aa infallible guide, they muft throw off all faith concerning the Gofpely for as good never a whit, as never the better. And therefore it is no wonder Atheifm ihould be fo thriving a plant in Jt'^y^ nay under, if not within the walls of Rome it lelf, where rnqtrifirive perfbns do daily fee the jugglings and impo- ftures of rriejls in their pretended miracles, and from thence are brought to look upon Religion its felf as a mere impofture, and to think no Pope fo infallible as helthat ikid,J^amum nobi^ profuit hac de Chrifio fahula ? Such horrid|fcnrequences do men drive others, if not bring themfelves, to, when they em- ploy their parts and induftry rather to uphold a corrupt in- tereft^ than to promote the belief of the acknowledged prin- ciples of Chriftian faith. But as long as we alTert no tiecef- fiiy of fuch a power of miracles to be the note of any true Church, nor any fuch neceffity of an infallible guide, but that the miracles wrought by Chrifi and his Apoftles, were fufficir- ent evidences of a d^lvine fpirit in them ; aad that the Scri- ptures were recorded by them to be an infallible rule of faith, here we have more clear reafbn as to the primary motives ^ndi grounds of faith, and withal the infallible veracity oi God in the Scriptures, as the lafl: refolution oi^ faith. And while we affert fuch dXiinfallible rule of faith^ delivered to us by fuch an unanimous confent from the firfl delivery ot it, and then ib fully attefied by fuch uncontrollable miracles^ we cannot in the leaft under Hand to what end a power of miracles fhould now Icrve in the C^^rc/?,efpecially among thofe who all believe the Scriptures to be the Word of God, Indeed before the great harveft of Converts in the primitive times were brought in, both of Jews and Gentiles^ and the Church fully fetled in recei- ving the Canon of the Scriptures univerfally, we find God did continue this power among them ; but after the Books of the New Teftament were generally embraced as the rule of faith among Chriftians, we find them fb far from pretending to any fuch power, that they rejedl the pretenders to it, fuch as the Donatifts were, and plead upon the fame accounts as we do. now againft the neceffity of it. "We fee then no reafbn in the world for miracles to be continued where the doftrine of faith is Chap. 5. TheTmth-of Scrtpture^HiJlory ajfert€ of the divine Spirit from &vong imprefftons of fancy by tht force, ' and 1 5^4 Ortgines Sacr^ : Book 11. Ohje^. and energy of them. If it be faid, That we are hound to believe thofe, TPhj [ay zhey are fully fati^fied of their Divine Cornmif/ion, Jnfiv, I. 1 anfwer Firft, this will expofe us to all delufions imaginable; for if we are bound to believe them becaufe they fay fo, we are bound to believe all which fay fo; and none are more confi- dent pretenders to this than the greateft deceivers, as the ex- 2. perience of our age will fufficiently witneis. Secondly^ Men muft necedarily be bound to believe contradiBions ; for nothing is more ordinary, than for fuch confident pretenders to a Divine Spirit , to contraditl one another , and it may be , the lame perlbn in a little time contradiB himfelf: and muft we ftill be bound to believe all they fay ? If fo, no Vhilofophers would be fo much in requeft, as thofe Jriftotle difputes againft in his Metaphyficks , who thought a thing might be, and not be, 3. at the fame time. Thirdly ^ TliQ ground of faith at laft will be but a mere humane tejlimony, as far as the perfbn who is to be- lieve is capable of judging of it; For the M^iejiion being, Whe- ther the perfbn I am to believe hath divine authority for what he faith, What ground can I have to believe that he hath fo ? Muft I take his bare affirmation for it ? If fb , then a mere humane testimony muft be the ground of divine faith, and that which it is laft refolved into ; if it be faid. That I am to believe the divine authority by which he fpeaks , when he fpeakf in the name of God: I anfwer, th^ queft ion will again return, how I fliall know he fpeaks this from divine authority ? and lb there muft be a progrels in infinitum , or founding divine faith on a mere humane teftimony, if I am to believe divine revelation merely on the account of the perfon's affirmation who pretends unto it. For in this cafe it holds good, non apparently & non exijientis eadem efi ratio ; if he be divinely infpired, and there be no ground inducing me to believe that he is fo , I fhall be excufed, if I believe him not, if my wilfulnels and lazinefsbe not the caufe of my unbelief Seel. 5, If it be faid. That God will fatis fie the minds of good men con- cerning the truth of divine revelation, I grant it to be wonder- fully true ; but all the queftion is de modo, how God will fatif- fie them ? whether merely by infpiration of his own fpirit in them, alTuring them that it is God that fpeaks in fuch perfons ; or by giving them rational evidence , convincing them of fuffi- cient grounds to believe it. If w^e ailert the former way, we run Chap. 3. The truth of Scripture-Htflory ajferted. 135- run into thefe inconveniences : Ilrp:-, We make as immediate i. a revelation in all thofe who believe, as inthofe who are to re- veal divine truths to us ; for there is a new revelation of an object immediately to the mind-^ viz. that fuch aperfon is ivfpi- red of God ; and fo is not after the common way of the 5"//- m's illumination in Believers^ which is by inlightning the fa- culty , without the propofition of any new objecr , as it is in the work of Grace : So that according to til is opinion, there mud be immediate infpiration as to that act of faith^ W'hereby we believe any one to have been divinely infpired^ and confequent- ly to that whereby we believe the Scriptures to be the Word of God. . Secondly^ Doth not this make the faireft plea for men's 2. unbeliefs For, I demand. Is it the duty of thofe who want that immediate illuminatiom^ believe or no ? If it be not their duty , unbelief CRU be no^^to them ; if it be a duty^ it muft be made known to be a duty ; and how can that be made known to them to be a i«ry, when they want the only and necef- lary means of ii^ruBion in order to it ? Will God condemn them for that , which it was impoffible they fliould have , un- lefs God gave it them ? And how can they be left inexcufabky who want fo much as rational inducements to faith ; for of thele I now fpeak, and not of efficacious perfuafions of the mind, when there arc rational arguments for faith propounded. But, /^//y, 2. I fuppole the cafe will be cleared , when we take notice what . courfe God hath always taken to give all rdtiofial fat is faction to the minds of men, concerning the perfons whom he hath im- ployed in either of the forementioned cafes. Firfl^ For thofe who have been imployed upon fome fpecial mefage and fervice for God^ he hath fent them forth fufficiently provided with mani- feftations of the Divine power whereby they adied ; as is mod clear and evident in the prefent cafe of Mofes, Exodm 4. i, 2, 3,4,5. where Mofes puts the cafe to Ged^ which we are now debating of. Suppofing, faith he, that I (liould go to the //- raelites and tell them, God had appeared to me, and fent me to deliver them, and they ihould fay , God had not appeared unto me ; how (hould I fatisfie them ? God doth not reject this objecl ion of Mofes as favouring of unbelief ^ but prefently Ihews him how he ihould fatisfie them , by caufing a miracle before his face , turning his Rod into a Serpent ; and God gives this as the reafon of it , verf, 5. That they may believe that the Lordr 1^6 Origlnes Sacrcc : Book IT. Lord God of their Fathers , the God of Abraham , the God of Ifaac, the God of Jacob, hath appeared unto thee. It feems God himfelf thought this would be the mofl pregnant evidence of God's appearing to him , if he wrought miracles before their faces. Nay, left they fnould think one fingle miracle was not fufficient. Cod in the immediate following verfes adjoyns two more, which he (liould doe in order to their fatisfadion j and further, verf. 21. God gave him a charge to doe all thofe won- ders before Pharaoh^ which he had put into his hand : And accordingly we find Tharach prefently demanding a miracle of Afofeyy Excdm^ 7. 9. which accordingly Mofes did in his pre- fence, though he might fuppole Pharaoh^s demand not to pro- ceed from defire of fatisfadtion, but from fome hopes that for want of it, he might have rendre(^^3 credit fufpefted among the Jfradites. ^^ Seel, 6. Indeed after Gi?J had delivered his people , and had fetled them in a way of ferving him according to'^he Laws delive- red by MofeSy w^hich he had confirmed by unqueftionable mi- racles among them, we find a caution laid in by Mofes himfelf, againft thofe wliich fhould pretend figns and wonders to draw them off from the Religion efiablifhed by the Law of Mofes. Deut.13. 1,^2, And fo likewife under the Gojfel ^ after that was eftablilhed 3- by the unparal/ell'd miracles of our Saviour and the Apofiles y we find frequent cautions againft being deceived by thofe who came with pretences of doing great miracles. But this is ^o far from infringing the credibility of fuch a Tefiimony which is confirmed by miracles , that it yields a ftrong confirmation to the truth of what I now alTert. For the doBrine is fuppofed . to be already efiablijhed by miracles^ according to which we are to judge of th^Jpirits of Cuch pretenders. Now it ftands to the greateft realbn, that when a Religion is once efiablijhed by uncontrolled miracles^ we fliould not hearken to every whif- fling Conjurer that will pretend to doe great feats, to draw us off from the truth eftablillied. In which cafe, the fureft way to difcover the impofture is , to compare his pretended miracles with thofe true and real ones which were done by Alofes and Chrift ', and the ground of it is, becaufe every perfbn is no competent ;W;^^ of the truth of a miracle y for th^ Devil, by his power and fubtilty, may cafily deceive all (uch as will be led by the uok by him, in cxpcdlation of fome wonders to be done Chap/ 3. The Truth of Script ure-Hiflory ajferted. 137; done by him. And therefore as long as we have no ground to queftion the certainty of thofe miracles which were wrought by Chrifi or Mofes, I am bound to adhere to the do^rine efta- bhilied by thofe miracles , and to make them my rule of judg- .ing all perfons who (hall pretend to work miracles: Becaufe, ^^ I . I do not know how far God may give men over to be de- ceived by lying wonders^ who will not receive the truth in the love efit\ i, e. thole that think not the Chriftian Religion fuffici- ently confirmed by the miracles wrought at the firft promulga- tion of it. God in jfiflice may permit the Devil to go further than otherwife he could, and leave fuch perfons to their own credulity, to believe every im.pofture and illufion of their len- fes for true miracles. 2. That doBrine which was confirmed 2.- by undoubted miracles^ hath af[ured us of the coming of lying wonders^ whereby many (liould be deceived. Now this part of the doctrine of the GoJ^el is as certainly true as any of the reft ; for it was confirmed by the fame miracles that the other was ; and befides that, the very coming of fuch miracles is an evidence of the truth of it, it falling out fo exactly according to what was foretold fo many hundred years (ince. Now if this doBrine be true, then am I certain the intent of thefe mi^ racks is to deceiiie ^ and that thofe are deceived who hearken to them ; and what reafon then have I to believe them ? ;. To -what end do thefe miracles y^-r-z/^ ? Are they to confirm the truths contained in Scripture f But what need they any 2* confirmation now, when we are afliired by the miracles wrought by Chrifi and his Apofiles^ that the doctrine by them preached came from God^ and fo hath been received upon the credit of thofe miracles ever fince. Were thefe truths fufficiently proved to be from God before or no ? If noty then all former ages have believed without fuflficient ground for faith ; if they were, then what ground can there be to confirm us in them now ? Certainly God, who never doth any thing but for very great purpoles , will never alter the courfie of nature , merely for fatisfadion of men's vain curiofitties. But it may be it will be iaid , It wa^ fiomething not fully re- Secf. 7. "vealed in Scripture which is thm confirmed by miracles : but where hath the Scripture told us, that any thing not fully revealed therein, (hould be afterwards confirmed ? Was the Scripture an infallible rule o^ faith while this was wanting in it J Did Chrifi: T and 138 Origines Sacra:: Book 11. arid his Apoftks difcharge their places, when they left fbme- thing unrevealed to us ? Was this a duty before thefe miracles, or no ? if it ivas , what need miracles to confirm it ? if not , Chrifi hath not told us all neceffary conditions offalvation. For whatever is required as a duty , is fuch , as the negle(ft of it . runs men upon damnation. Laftly , men's faith will be left at continual uncertainties \ for we know not according to this princij^k^ when we have all that is necelTary to be believed, or doe all that is necedary to be pratiifed in order to falvation. For if God may ftill make new articles of faith, or conftitute new duties by frefli miracles, I muft go and enquire what wi- racles are wrought in every place , to lee that I mifs nothing that may be necejfary for me, in order to my happinefs in ano- ther world. If men pretend to deliver any doclrine contrary to the Scri- pture ', then it is not only necejfary that they confrm it by mi- racles , but they muft manifeft the falfity of tliofe miracles on which that doBrine is believed, or elfe they muft ufe another miracle to prove that God will let his feal to confirm both parts of a contradiction to be true. Which being the hardcfi task of all, had need be proved by very fufficient and undoubted mira- cles, fuch as may be able to make us believe thofe are miracles y and are not, at the lame time, and lb tliQ Jlrength of the argu- ment is utterly deftroyed by the medium produced to prove it by. By this dilcourle thele trvo things are clear ; Firfi, That 710 pretences of miracles are to he hearkned to, when the dotlrine we are to believe is already eftahlifhedhy them, if thofe miracles tend in the leaji to the derogation of the truth of what was eflablijhed by thofe former miracles. Secondly , That when the full doBrine we are to believe is ejiablijhed by miracles , there is no necefjfity at all of new miracles, for confirmation of any of the truths therein delivered. And therefore it is a moft unreafonable thing to demiand miracles of thofe to prove the truth of the dodrine they deliver, who do firfi folemnly profefs to deliver nothing but what was confirmed by miracles in the firft delivery of it, and is contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Tefia- ment, and fecondly do not pretend to any immediate Commiffion from heaven, but do nothing but what in their confciences they think every true Chriftian is bound to doe ; much more all Ma^ifirates and Minifters who believe the truth of what they profels. chap. 4. the Truth of Scripture- Hiflory ajferteet. .139 profefs, which is in their places to reform all err ours and a^ bufes which are crept into the doclrine or pra^ice of Chrifiia^ nity, through the corruption of men or times. And therefore it is a moft unjuft and unreafonable demand of the Fapifts , ' when they require miracles from our firft reformers , to prove the truth of their doBrine with. Had they pretended to have come with an immediate commiffton from heaven to have added to the DoBrine of the Gojpel , there had been fome plea for fuch a demand ; but it was quite otherwife with them : Their only deiign was, to whip the buyers and fellers out of the Temple^ to purge the Church from its abufes : And although that by Jerome was thought to be one of our Saviours greateil mira- cles^ yet thi6 by us is conceived to be no other than the duty of all Magiftrates, Minifters^ and private Chriftians ; thefe by their prayers^ Minifters by their doctrine^ and Magijirates by their juft authority. C H A P. IV. The fidelity of the Prophets fucceeding Mofes, An order of Prophets tofucceed Mofes, by God's own appointment in the Law of Mofes. The Schools of the Frophets^ the origi- nal and inftitution of them. The Cities of the Levites, The occafton of their firfl inftitution. The places of the Schools of the Prophets , and the tendency of the infiitution there to a prophetical office. Of the Mufick ufed in the Schools of the Prophets. The Roman Jjfamenta , and the Greek Hymns in their folemn worfhip. The two forts of Prophets among the Jews, Leiger and extraordinary. Ordinary Prophets taken out of the Schools y proved by Amos and Saul. BU T although now under the GoJ}>el ( the revelation of Se^. i. God's Will being compleated by Chrifi and his Jpoftles ) we have no reafon either to expecl: new Revelations, or ?2ew Miracles for confirming the old ; yet under the Law, God trai- ning up his people by degrees till the coming of Chrifi, there was a neceflity of a new fupply of Divine Me fingers ( called T 2 Prophets ) T40 tes Sacra : Book If; Prophets) to prepare the people , and make way for the co- ming ofChrifi, As to whom thefe two things are confiderable. Firft, Tbofe Frophets whofe work was to inform the ptople of. their duties^ or to reprove them for their fins^ or toprepare them for the coming of the Mejftas (which were their chief tasks) hdd no need to confirm the truth of their dotirine or commiffion from heaven by the working of miracles among them. And that on thefe two accounts. , Firft, Becaufe God did not confummate the revelation of his mind and will to the]tv:s by the Minijlry - /tteV©- v(p\)y\ifj^\i xj c/>c/kV;cej'7©'» '^ d I'^^tfivirav eiV ys^O'^ytL^idv ^ PhiIo.de v.Mof. ■9>iK'n>ifJ^m TttTs €9m ^ T ^lov. ThePrefident going before and teach- ^- 3- ing,the refi increafing ingoodnefs^and improving in life and manners. Neither can we think fo good and ufeful an inflitution, (hould ^^^* 4« prtikntly degenerate or be turned into another channel; and therefore fome conceive that the moft noted Prophets to the time of David were the Prefidents of thefe Colledges ; fuch V as 1^6 Orighes Sacra : Book IT. as befides SamusIvJtvt Helcam^Gady Nathan^ Hemariy ^nd Jedu-^ thun i and that they feleftcd out the chokeft and moft hopefut- of thtyeung Levites^ and here educated them, together with the Nfjzarites which came out of other tribes. And it feems very probable, that in all the moft noted high places whither they went to faciifice, there were fuch Schools eredted after thQfirfi inftitution of them Thence w^e read of fuch multi- tudes of the Prophets together, in the time of Ahaby i Kings 18.4. for when Jezabel cut off the Prophets of the Lord,^ Ohadiah took an hundred and hid them in caves ; certainly their number was very great, when an hundred might befaved with- out miffing. The chief places where they refided, feem to have been Bethel^ a Kings 2. 3. and Jericho^ which was a Large Colledge ; for therein we read of fifty fons of the Fro- phets jianding together out of theirnumher^ 2 Kings 2. 5-, 7,1^. and Gilgaly which had been a place of Religion from the firft entrance into Canaan \ there we find the fons of the Prophets fitting before EUfha^ iKings4.38. It feems moft probable that the purity of God's worftiip among the ten tribes after the defection in the time o^ Jeroboam was preferved by the Fro* phets in their fever al Schools and places of habitation j which hath ihSicknt foundation in that place, 2 Kings 4. 2;. where the Shunamite''^\im\m\di asks YiQr wherefore fhe would go to the man of God that dayy feeing it was neither new-moon nor Sab- bath, Whereby it is both evident, that the Prophets did un- dertake the office of inftrudling the people on thdvfolemn Fe- fiivalsy and that it was their cuftom to refbrtto them for that y Manaff. Ben ^^^' Thus we fee what care God took for the inftrudion of ifraei Concii. in his pcoplc in a time of fb general an Apofiafie as that of the Exod. 5). 35. ten tribes was,whcn tht Church of God could not be known by that confiant vifibility and outward Glory which fome fpeak fo much of, but was then clouded in obfcurity^ and fhrouded it felf under the mantles of fome Prophets which God continued a- mong them, and that not by any lineal fucceffwn neither, though the Jews would fain make the gift of Prophecy to be a kind of Cabala too , and conveyed in a conftant fucceffion from one Prophet to another. Neither were thefe Schools of the Prophets only in Ifraely but in Judah likewifc was God known, and his Name wa^ great among thefe Schools there. In Jerufa- km it felf there was a. Colledge where Huldah the Prophetefs lived. Chap. 4. The Truth of Scripture- ITiflory affertedt, x\j lived, 7. Kings ii. 14. Ibme render Mijhna in 'fecunda urbh partem for Jerufaiem was divided into the upper and nether part of the City. Abuknfis and Lyra will have it referr to the three Walls of the City in which the three chief parts of it were comprized } in the firfi^ the Temple and the Kings Palace •, in the fecond-, the Nobles and the Prophets houfes ; and in the thirdy the common people. Jofephm (eems to favour the divifion of the ^ rj t. n ^ j City into three parts ; but Pineda thinks the fecondpart of the J^^ [.e.Pine/it. City was moll inhabited by Artificers^ and that the Prophets^ de rebus SoL and the wife men^ and fuch as frequented the Temple^ moft /. 3- ^- -8- ^dwelt in the City of David within the firft Wall j and there- fore he conjectures that the Colledge was upon Mount Sion , (and fo properly called Sion Colledge) and he explains that hoMfe which wifdom is faid to have built ^ and hewn out her feven. pillarSjVrov.^,!. by this Colledge , which he fuppofeth was built by Solomon in Mount Sion, and thence ver. ^. Jhe is faid to cry upon the higheft places of the City. Thus much may lerve concerning the original and inflitution of thefe Schools of the Prophets. I now come to the lecond thing promifed concerning the Se^L 5. Schools of the Prophets^ which is, that it was God's ordinary method to call thofe perfons out of thefe Schools^ whom he did employ in the difcharge of the Prophetical office. Two things will be necelTary for the clearing of this : Firfi , what tendency their education in thofe Schools had towards the fitting them for their prophetical Office, Secondly, what evidence the Scri- pture gives U6 that God called the Prophets out from thefe Col- ledges. The firfi of thefe is very requifite to be cleared, be- ■caule the prophetical office depending upon immediate infpira- tion, it is hard to conceive what " infiuence any antecedent and preparatory difpofitions can have upon receiving the prophe- tical fpirit. It is commonly known how much the genera- lity of Jewifly Writers do infill on the neceffity of thefe qua- lifications antecedent to a fpirit of Prophecy, i. An excellent natural temper. 2. Good accomplifioments both of wit and for- tunes, ;. Separation from the world, 4. Congruity of place y q pr^^ ^^ (which they make proper to Judaa) 5. Opportunity of time. Maim,fundafn» 6. And divine infpiration. Thefe are fo largely difcourfcdof by leg. en- s^^-^- many learned men from Jewifij writers, that it will be both ^^' ^'"^'^^ ^^ tedious and impertinent to recite much of their opinions con- ^'V^'^J- c- ^• V 2 cerning 148 Origines Sacra : Book II: cerning them ; who, fince they have loft the gift of Prophecy, feem to have loft too that ^i^ifdom and natural under fianding, which they make one of the moft necejjary e^ualifications of a^ Fropbet, It is not eafie to imagine what fubferviency riches could have to a prophetical fpirit, unlefs the Jews be d^ Simon Magm his opinion, that thele gifts of the Holy Gho(l may be purchafed with money ; and if fo, they think therafelves in as likely a way to bid fair for a prophetical fpirit,^s any People.in the world. Or is it that they think it impoffible any without them fhould have that/ree, cheerfu/l.^nd generous fpirity which they make fo neceflary to a prcphetick jpirit^ that it is aii, axiome of great authority with them, Spmtus fanclm non re^ fidet fuper hominem moeftum -^ and they think Elijha his lit of pafTion did excufs his prcphetick [pint from him, which he was fain to retrieve a^ain with a fit of Mufick. There are only two forts of thofe antecedent difpojitions which feem to bear any affinity with the prcphetick fpirit : And thofe are fuch as tended to tn^ improvement of their natural faculties, and fugh as tended to their advancement in piety, and confequent^ ly to the fubduing all irregular motions in their fouls: Not that either of thele did concur r by way of efficiency to the produ- Ta.V^S^r'' ^^^" ^^ 2i fpirit of Prophecy (which is an opinion Maimonides feems very favourable to) but that God might make choice par- ticularly of fuch perfons, to remove all prejudices againft them in thoie they were lent unto. For nothing could pofTibly dijfatisfie them more concerning divine infpiration, than if the perfon who pretended to it were of very -weak and jhallow in- telleBuals, or known to be of an irregular converfation. Itl order therefore to the fuller fat is f allien of men concerning thefe two qualifications, XK\S Infiitution of them in the Schools of the Prophets v/^s of gvQ^t fuhferviency, hQcauik therein their only employment w^as to improve in knowledge, and efpecially in true piety. This latter being the moft neceflary difpo- fition, fince the Apoftle hath told us that the Prophets were 1 Pit. 1. 2 J. Holy men, who fpake as they were moved by the Holy Ghofi. And in order to this, the greatcft part we can find of the ex- rra/ej of thofe who were educated in theie Schools of the Pro- phets, were infi-ruBions in the Law, and the folemn celebrati-^ on of the praifes of God: Which appears in Scripture to have been their chief employment as Prophets, and by which they are More Nevoc. Chap. 4. the Truth of Scripture- Hijiory ajferted. Ic^} ^ ; arc faid to Frophefte: So at Gibeab at the Oratory there, we , ^^^^ j^ ^^ find a company of Vrophets coming down from the high place with a Vjaltery , a Tabret and Fipe, and a Harp before theWy and Frophejying, It may feem fomewhat ftrange to confider what relation Se^. 6. thefe Muftcal injlruments had to the Vrophefying here mentio- ned. Are Mufical notes like (bme feeds Natnralifis fpeak ofj which will help to exxite a prophetick fpirit ? Or do they tend to elevate the j^ir its of men, and fo put them into a grea*- ter capacity of Enthufiafm ? Or is it becaufe Mufick is h excel- lent for allaying the tumults oi mv^dixdi pajfions ; and fo fitting the foul for the better entertainment of the Divine Spirit f Or was all thk Frophefying here fpoken of nothing elle but vocal and infirumental Mufick? So fome indeed underftand it, that it was only the praifmg God with J}>iritual fongs and melo^ dy ; wherein one as the Fracentor began a hymn , which the reft took from him and carried on. I confels it carries the faireft probability with it , that this Prophefying with Mufical infi.ruments was -at their places and times offacrifice, an adjun^^ if not a part of the folemn fervice of God : which was mana- §!^ chiefly by the Choir of the Sons of the Prophets which were refident there, and were trained up in all exerciles of pr^ ety and devotion. But yet I cannot fee any reafon to think that all this Prophefying was merely linging of Hymns^ and playing upon their Mufical infiruments to them, as fome imagine, be^ caufe there feems to be implied fome immediate impulfes of a prophetick fpirit , by what Samuel laid to Saul, that when he, came am.ong the Prophets , the Spirit of the Lord would come upen him , andhe fhould prophefie with them ^ and hejhould be^ ^ Sam; 10. ^,- come another man. What ftrange impulfe and wonderfull tranf^ formation was this merely for Saul to join with the Prophets in their praifes of God f And this needed not fo much admi^ ration as followed there upon this aftion of Saul's^ that it fhouid become a Proverb, Is Saul alfo among the Prophets f Cer- ' ^^^-^^^ ^- tainly Saul was a very great hater r-f dWfiiritual Mufick before, if it became a Proverb merely for his being prefent at , or joyning with this company mfinging thdr Hymns, Therefore others think that thofe who are/aid particularly to prophefie at thefe Mufick meetings, were fome perfons as chief among the reft, who having their j|/?/r/r/ elevated by the Mufick y did compofe ^ymnSj lyo X)rrgines Sacrje : Book 11. Hymns upon the place by a Divine Energy inwardly moving ■ their minds. So that there were properly divine raptures in fome of them, which tranfported them beyond the ordinary power 0^ fancy or imagination^ in diclating fuch Hymns as might be fuitable for the defign of celebrating the honour of God. S£^. 7. Neither may it feem ftrange that fuch an Enthufiaftick Spi- rit (hould feize on them only at fuch folemn times , fince we read in the New Teftament of a like exercife of fuch gifts in the Church of Corinth, i Cor. 14. 26. where we fee in coming together every one had a Pfalm^ a Docfrine^ a Tongue, 'a Reve- lation, &c. Whereby it appears that they were infpired upon the place-; etiam extemporales Hymni fjpe ah afflatu erant, as Grotim there obferves ; as we fee it in frequent inftances in Scripture, of Simeon and Anna, Mofes and Miriam, Deborah and Ifaiah ; and in the Chriftian Church after that Land-flood , of infpired ^//>/ was much abated in the Church, they kept up a cufiom much like to thefe extemporal hymns, as appears evi- .^pcl c. 39. dently by Tertullian, poft aquam manualem & lumina ut quifque de Scripturis fanBis vel deproprio ingenio pot eft , provocatur in medium Deo canere ; After they had ended their Love-Feafts , they begun their Hymns , which were either taken from the £p. I I o. Scriptures, or of their own compojition. Which Pliny takes no- ^/- 91- tice of as a great part of the Chriftians worfliip, that they did fecum invicem carmen Chrifto quafi Deo dicer e, they joyned infing- ing hymns to Chrtft as God. Nay, W€ find lomething YQry pa- rallel to this prcierved among the ruins of the Heathen wor- /hip J fuch were the Affamenta among the old Romans^ which were peculiarly fung to the honour of fome particular God ; thence the Ajfamenta Janualia, Junonia, Minervia, which were privata poemata & carmina in fingulos eos Beos confer ipt a , as <:9njea. in the learned Jofeph Scaliger obferves. So likewife the Greeks Varr,^. 1 21. had their folemn hymns to their Gods, fome to the propitious Gods, which they called KhrdU v'y.vti^y and the Latins properly Jndigit amenta, and Carmen calatorium-, others they had to their Vejoves , or Lava numina , which they called tiuv^i knn- Te?W«r the Latins, Carmen Averruncale \ but belides thefe, 'they had fome peculiar to the feveral Deities, as o v-^yyQ- to Diana, Uctiav K) Apollo, *I»/^ to Ceres, Dithyrambm to Bac- chus, Adonidia to Admis,ns Vroclmtdls us in his Chreftomathia, And it is withall evident, that the Heathens thought fome of their Chap. 4^ The Truth of Scripture-Hijiory ajfertect. rji their Tr lefts infpircd while they were performing thefe folemn y^pudPhot^Bik Devotions to the Gods ( which probably was by Satan^ as ma- ^od. 239. ny other things in Heathen worftoip taken up in imitation of thefe infpired hymns^ and Mufick ufed by the fons of the Pro- phets ) but their hymns were h compofed^ as to be fit rather to tran^ort men beyond the power of their reafon , than to com- pofe cLudfrveeten it, which was fuitable to the fanatick EnthH- fiafm^ which was fo common among them. So Frocks tells us that the lo-Bacche was ^i^ct-^TJKTfj^©- t^aaw (pfu^Vf^?/, /<«// ofnoife and i/«; and the Dithyrambm was )ter^t'«^V©" «d t^jaJ TB Iv^affidchi, (/^ :>^^^cti i^.^ctivav^ a kind of extatick Moricedance, and their Triefts were apprehended by them to be under a re- al Enthufiafm at thefe Solemnities, So the Cory bant es are de- Icribed rather like mad men than mere Enthufiafts by 5/T^^a ; they were h^i^^mA^yjol mi^ ;^ B66x.;^k&/ , as he defcribes them, dancing about with their cymbals and drums ^ and arms and^fipes^ ( as though ^ Bedlam had been broke loofe among them ) yet this was in high efteem among them ; for, as Strabo after Geogr.L 10. laith , 07? Iv^jiffteto'ixoi ^vivaiv wet •^hclv 'ixi^ '^^^ j ^ "ttS uomJik^ -^a T^md^HVy this Enthufiafm feemed to have a divijie touch with it^ and to come very near to aprophetickjpirit. But though the Vrophefying with Mufick among the fons of the Prophets^ might be by Ibme extemporary hymns immediate- ly di(^ated by the Vracentor of the Chorus \ yet we are not to imagine any fuch frantick actions among them as were a- mong the Curetes and Corybantes , it being always the Devil's temper to over-doe^ when he drives to imitate^ and inftead of . folemn and fet devotions^ to carry men beyond all fienfe and rea- fm. The Spirit of God did never dilate any Jo-Bacche's or Dithyrambs to tranjport and amufe the J^irits of men \ but tho^^fweet airs which might both compofe and elevate the fpi- rits of all that heard them. For in probability the fiir its of all thefe Prophets were as Lutes tuned to the fame height, that when the Spirit of God did ftrike upon one of them, the reft- prefently anfmred to it , and fo made up an entire Confort a-r mong them. So Menochius thinks the Spirit of God not on- ly moved thtjpirit of him who was the Pracentor^ but the reft like wife who joyned with him ; and they are iaid to pro- phefie, faith Torniellm , forte quodnon quafcunque fed Propheti- Annal.adji.m ioa dmtaxat cantioms pr^^cinerent \ but from hence we clearly 2945. 5^^?. 14, fee. lyi' - Or/ghes Sacra r Book II. -fee what the great employment was in thefe Schools of thQ Tre- ■ phetSy which, as the fame Author exprelfeth, it was ftatk ho- ris de rebm divinis dijferere & divin'is landihm vacate \ and thereby we underftand what reference this infiitution had in .order to the prophetical office , becaufe the Spirit of God did much appear among them , and all their exercifes tended to piety, and fo did remove dll prejudices from their perforis^ when God did fend them abroad afterwards. SeB. 8. -^^^ ^^ ^^ is evident he frequently did , not to fay always , for that were to put too great a reftraint upon the boundlefs jpirit of God: For fometimes, as will appear afterwards, God fent the Vrophets upon extraordinary mejfages , and then fur- nijhed them with fiifficient evidence of their Divi'ne commifftony without being beholding to the Teftimonials of the Schools of the Vrophets. But befides thefe , God had a kind of Leiger- Tropd^ts among his Teople ; fuch were the moft of thofe whom we read of in Scripture, which were no Pen-men of the facred Scripture j fuch in David^stimcwt may conceive G ad ^nd Na* than, and afterwards we read of many other Vrophets and Se- ers among them, to whom, the people made their refort; Now thefe in probability were fuch as had been trained up in the Vrophetick Schools, wherein the Spirit of God did appear, but in a morQ fixed and fettled way than in the extraordinary Prophets whom God did call out on fome more/r^w^/occafions, fuch as Ifaiah and Jeremiah were. We have a clear foundati- ,on for fuch a dlfiinBion of Prophets in thofe words of Amos to Amaziah , Amos 7. 14, 1 5. / wcu no Vrophet , neither woi I a Vrophets fon ; hut I was a herdfman and a gatherer of Sycamore fruits : And the Lord took me cu, I followed the flock-, and the Lord faid mito me , Go prophefie to my people Jfrael. Some un- derftand the iiift w'ords, / was not a Prophet^ that he was not born a Vrophet, as Jeremiah was, not deligned and let apart to it from his mother's womb -, but I rather think by his not being a Prophet, he means, he was none ofthoitrejident Prophets in the Colledges or Schools of them , not any of thofe who had led a prophetick life , and withdrawn themlelves from converfe with the world; nor was I (faith he) the fon of a Prophet , z. e. not brought up in difciplefhip under thole Prophets , and thereby trained up in order to thQ prophetick function, Nondi- dici inter difcipulos Vrophet arum, as Vcllican renders it ; nee in- ftitutione Chap. 4. The Truth of Scripture-Hiflory averted. ij'j (litutime qua filii Profhetarum cjuaji ad donum Profhetta a farentihus praparabantur, faith Efiius, Non a puero educatus in Scholis Prophttias ; fo Calvin and mod other modern In^ terpreters underftand it as well as Aharbinel and the Jewifli Writers. "Whereby it is evident that God'^ ordinary way for the PraphetSy was to take fuch as had been trained up and edu- cated in order to that end, although God did not tie up him- f elf to this method^ but fbmetimes called one from the Courts as he did Ijaiah ; Ibmetimes one from the herds^ as here he did Amos, and bid tlKmgo prophejie to the houfe of Ifrael. There was then a kind of a fiandmg College of Prophets among the Ifraelites, who (Inned as fixed Stars in the Firmament ; and there were others who had a more planetary motion, and with- all a more lively and rejplendent illumination from th^ foun- tain of prophetick Itght. And further it feems that the ^int of Prophecy 'did not ordinarily feize on any , but fuch whole inftitution was in order to that end, by the great admiration which was caufed among the people at 5^«/*s fo fudden prophe- fying, that it became a Proverb, Is Saul alfo among the Pro- i Sam. ro. u, phets ? which had not given the \t^^ foundation for an adage '^' ^^' . for a firange and unwonted thing , unlefs the moft common appearances of the fiirit of Prophecy had been among thofe who were trained up in order to it. Thus I fuppofe we have fully cleared the firft reafon why there was no necejfity for the ordinary Prophets, whole chief office was infiruBion of the peo- ple, to prove their commiffion by miracks, becaufe God had promifed a jucceffion of Prophets by Mofes, and thcfe were brought up ordinarily to that end among them ; fo that all prejudices were fufficiently removed from their perfons with- out any fuch extraordinary power as that of miracks. r ' CHAP. 15*4 Origines Sacra: Book II. C H A P. V. . The tryal of Prophetical Dodlrine. RhUs of trying Vrofhets e[tahUfhed in the Law 0/ Moles. The fumjioment of fretenders. The feveral forts of falfe Prophets^ The cafe of the Profhet at Bethel dijcufed. The tryal of falfe Frofhets he longing to the great Sanhedrin. The parti- cular rules whereby the doBrine of Prophets was judged. The "proper notion of a Prophet^ not foretelling future contingencies^ but having immediate di'vine revelation. Several principles laid down for clearing the docirine of the Prophets, i. That immediate dilates of natural light are not to be the meafure of divine revelation. Several grounds for divine revelation- from natural light, 1. Whatever is direBly repugnant to the dictates of nature^ cannot be of divine revelation. 3. No di^ 'vine revelation doth contradiB a divine pojitive Law with' out fuffic lent evidence of Gud^s intention to repeal that Law. 4. Divine revelation in the Prophets was not to be meafured by the 7Vords of the Law^ but by the intenticji and reafon of it. The prophetical Office a kind of Chancery t$ the Law oj Mofes. TH E fecond reafon 7vhy thofe Prophets whofe main office was inftruUion of the people^ or merely foretelling future events^ needed not to confirm their do5tri7U by miracles^ is, be- iiaufe they had certain rules of tryal by their La7v whereby to difcern the falfe Prophets from the true. So that if they were deceived by them, it was their own ofcitancy and inadvertency which was the cauje of it. God in that Law which was con- firmedhy w/rould themfelves. And there was a greater necejfity of fuch a certain way of tryal among them , becaufe it could not other- wife be expeBed but in a Nation where a prophetick Spirit was fb common , "there would be very many pretenders to it , who might much endanger the faith of the people unlefs there were fome certain way to find them out. And the more effedual- ly to deter men either from comnerfeitwg a prophnick Spirit , OI' Chap. S* ^^^ Truth of Scripture- Hijlory a^ertedt, i'j'f or from hearkening to [uch as did , God appointed a fevere funijhment for every fuch pretender, ^uiz,. upon legal convi5li' en, that he be punijhed with death. Deut. i8. 20. But the Trophet which jhall prefume to J}>eak a word in my name which I have not commanded him to [peak, or that fljall ^eak in the name of other Gods, Jhall furely die. The Jews general- ly underftand this of/lrangling, as they do always in the Law^ when the particular manner of death is not exprefled. And therein a fal[e prophet and a feducer were diftinguifhed each from other, that a m^vt feducer was to hQfioned to death un- der fufficient ^7TVf{iVy retrieve it into fts former heat and aciivity. Thus it was with Jonas. 2. The other was, He that defpifed the words of a true frophet; of fuch God faith, Deut. 18. 19. Anditjljall come to pafs , that whofoever will vet hearken to my words which he jliall [peak in my name, I will retjuire it of him. Which Maim. Re fun- Maimomdes explains by iI3Vt2tI^ n'>3 HH^tD, death by tt'e hands ^_a7n.iegts,c.^. ofGod, wliich he thus diftinguiflieth from the am)6 , that he iineUe Ceret'h ^^^^^ ^^^ death /j^r mmms cceli^ to be lefs than the Ceretk, be- apudBuxtorf. caufc this latter continued in the foul after deaths but the other fieffoTif. & di- was expiated by death ; but generally they interpret it of ^fud- 'uort.f. 182. ^en death which falls upon the perfon. ;. The lall is, he who Ver"^8* ^^' ^^^^^^^^ ^^^ ^^ ^^^ words of his own prophecy, of which we havc a moft remarkable inftance in Scripture, concerning the Prophet whom God fent to Bethel (whom TertuUian calls Sameas, the Jews, Hedua ) whom Gi^^deftroyed in an unufual manner for not oblerving 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 excufe to this Frophet that the old Prophet at Bethel told him that an Angel [pake unto htm by the word of the Lord, that he Jljould turn back. For, I. Thojfe whom God reveals his will unto, he gives them full ajjurancc of it, in that they have a clear 2X\(idtftinB perception oi God upon their own minds ; and fo they have no doubt, but it is the ^ord of the Lord which comes unto them j but this Prophet could have no fuch certainty of the divine revelation which was made to another , efpecially when it came immediately to contradi^ that which was Co fpecially enjoyned him. 2. Where God commands a Prophet to doe any thing in the purfmt of his mejjage, there he can have no ground to queliion whether God fhould countermand it or no by another Prophet -, becauie that was in effect to thwart the whole defign of his mefj'age. So it was in this aftion of the Prophet \ for God intended his not cattng chap. 5". The Truth of Scripture- Hiftory ajferted, \ 5 7 %AUn^ and drinking in Bethel to teftifie how much he loathed and abominated that p/.^^c^ fince its being poliuted mih Idolatry, 5 He might have juft caufc to qnefiton the Integrity of the oldFropbet, both becaufe of his /i^w^ in Bethel, and not openly, according to his o^c^, reproving their Idolatry, and that G^^ (liould lend him out of Jud^a upon that very er- rand, which would not have Teemed fo probable, if there had been true Prophets rejident upon the flace, 4. The thing he defired him to do, was not an a5l of that -weight and impor- tance on which Goi uled to fend his IVord to any ^rophets^ much lels by one Prophet to contradid what he had faid by another, and therefore Tertullian faith of him, poenam defer ti De jejunuf^ jejunit luit, God puniflied him for breaking \m'Fafi at Bethel-, c^p- i^. -r- and therefore that meflage of this Prophet Teemed to gratifie more mans carnal appetite, th^m ufually the aclions of Prophets did, which were moft times matters of hardship and uneafinefs tothtfle/h. 5. However all thefe were, yet hQ yielded too yT5o;2,efpeciaHy having fo much reafon on his fide as he had ; be- ing well aJJiiredth^tGod had commanded him, he had reafon to fee fomx clear evidence of a countermand, before he altered his mind : if he hadjeen any thing upon tryal which might havQ fiaggered h'ls faith, he ought to have made his immediate recourfe to God by prayer for the fettlement of his mind and removal of this great temptation. But fo eafily to hearken to the words of a lying Prophet, which contradiBed his own mef- fage, argued either great unbelief zs to his own commijfion, or too great eafinefs ^nd inadvertency in being drawn afide by the old Prophet. And therefore God made that old Prophet him* felf in the midfi of his entertainment,, as with a hand-writing againfl the wall to tell him he was weighed in the balance and found too light, and therefore his/i/e (hould be taken from him. Thus we fee how dangerous a thing it was either to counterfeit a Spirit of Prophecy, or to heai^ken to thofe who did. It is the generally received opinion among xh^jewijh DoBors., Se£{. ^ that the cogniz,ance ^nd tryal of falfe Prophets did peculiarly belong to the great Sanhedrin, And that this was one end of its inftitution. So Maimonides after he hath largely dilcour- De idaUlat,. led of the punifiment of afeducer, and fpeaking of that of a <^- 5-f- n^ falfe Prophet, h^ lays this down as aftanding rule among them MJ? "TU; 132 i^fate) where after a particular examination of Jer. 26. \6. Jeremiah^ they acquit him as d.p€rfon not worthy to die upon a Jer. 38. 5. counterfeiting Prcpi^fc/, but declare that he fpake unto them in the name of the Lord. And' in this fence Grotius likewife underflands what is faid of Zedekiah concerning Jeremiah to the Princes of Judah afterwards, Behold he is in your hand ; for the King is not he that can do ought againfi you ;i. e. faith Grotius y in m ambus Sjnedrii cujus eft judicare de Prophet a vera aut falfo. And to this many raa:ke thofe vjords of our Savi- Luk. 13. 33. ^^^ refer, that it is impojfible a Prophet Jhould perijh out ofjQ- rufalem, becaufe the feat of the great Sanhedrin was in Je- Matth. 23. 70. rufahm',^r\d fo elfewherc our Saviour faithj O Jerufalem, Je- rufalem^ thou that killefi the Prophets and fionefi them which are fent unto thee ; becaufe there it was the true Prophets were deftroyed as though they had been falfe ones^ and Gods own mefengers punithed with the death of feducers, which was la- ptdation. And on this very account many are of opinion that cur Saviour was condemned by the Sanhedrin at jerufal'em ; which is fuppofed to have been aflembled in the houfe of C^/^- phas the High Prieft^ when Chrifi was carried thither for exa- mination \ which fbme think to have been at his lodgings in the Temple., Others at his Palace in the City. For we read that the Chief Pri^/?/, and the £/^6^?7,and all the CouncihwQVC Matth. 2(5. 59. met together at the High Priefi's Palace in order to our Savi- our's tryal. The next morning they were met early together again in order to the further /c^/w;^??^^ of this hufinefs ; but they fcem not to examine Chrifi concerning arr//«' /^/Wr of Prophecy y but concerning his being the Mejfias., and calling himfelf the Matth. iC. 63. Son of G^,muft be fearched and exa- mined, to fee what con f nancy it hath thereto. For the que- fti8n which Mode's fuppofcth,is founded upon clear and evident T^^fon, And if thcu jljalt fay in thine heart. How jhall we know j-j^^^ ^q ^^ the Word which the Lord hath not fpr ken ? For it being plain that there 1^(3 Origines Sacra : Book IL there may be falfe Frophets as well as fme^ we had need of fbme certain rules to judge of what is delivered for divine r€- 'velatiov. For the clearing of which important quefiion , I lay down thefe prwc rles. .1. The immediate dtBates of natural light are no ftifficient flan- dard to judge of druine revelation by. I mean not in reference to confonancy or repugnancy to natural light , but in reference to the extent and latitude of divine revelation-, i. e. that natu- ral light doth not contain in it whatever may be known of God or ofhis Will; and that upon thele reafons : i. It implies no repugnancy to any dilate of nature^ that God (liould reveal any thing more of his mind and wtU^ than is contained in the light of nature. 2. Nature reacheth, as to matters concerning religion, no further than the obligation to duty^ but leaves the • particular determination of the manner of obedience to divme fojiti^e Lawsy as is clear in reference to the time., place, and particular duties of Worjhip. 3. Nature owning an univerfal ohligaticn to the will of God in whatever he (hall command , doth fuppofe a powder in God to command what he pleafelh. 4 Nature is fenfible of its own decays., and the tmperfetlion of its own //V/j/, and therefore feems rather to require further //- lumination, than to put any bar againft it. 5. -^^w'i happinefs being a free gift o{ God's, it Hands to the %)&f/ re^yj)» that he fhould have the prefcribing of the conditions which are in order to it J now thefe conditions being the refults^ not of God^s na- ture., but of his arbitrarious willy it is impoffible that natural light could ever reach to the full difcovery of them. 6. It hath been the general fenfe of all Nations in the world, that God may reveal more ofhis will than nature can reach unto ; which lenfe difcovers it felf in two things, i . Fraying to their feveral godi hvdire^ion. i. Hearkening after pretended oracles^whkh the Devil could never have had that advantage of deceiving the 7/^6r/J by, had it not been for this general fenfe of mankind, that there wanted fome particular rei/e/^/iow from Gcitomake ■ men happy. So then this may be affumed as a principle.. That G^i may reveal more of his ?wW and will to mankind, than he hath done by the diBates of mere natural light ^ud reajon. 1. Whatever fpeaks a direB repugnancy to anj of the fundamen- SacL 6. tal diclates of nature, cannot be of divine revelation. Forthofe being founded, not upon any pojitivc or arbitrary will, but up- on chap. 5'. The Truth of Scripture-Htftory ajferted, i^i en thofe inrpard impreffions which are derived from the divme nature its felf, it cannot in reafon be fuppofed that God (houid commijfton any to enervate his own fundamental Law ; and fo by one will to contradict another. Placitum Regis muft never (land againft the Vlacita Corona : Thofe things which depend upon fundameyital and eftablijhed Laws, hold good againft any pofitive fentence or declaration of a Prince's will ; Recaufe he is fuppofed to have te;?i up himfelf by the cftablirned Laws -y and therefore any thing elfe which comes from him, contrary to them, is fuppofed not to be the mil of the Frince, but of the perfons perfuading him to it. But this now can- not be fuppofed in God , that he (hould be any ways drawn to cafate the obligation of what is imprinted upon the fouls of men as his owui L^it'. But yet we muft diftin- guiih between nulling the general obligation^ and altering the particular nature of any z-/;/;?^ which depends upon that ^^- »fr^/ L/jz??? , the firfi in any cafe is impofjible, that any iit'/^e revelation fliould make it not to be imns duty to (?% his maker^ or not to be ^fin to commit murder^ to /)/^, or to /^-^Z from another 'j but there may come ^particular revelation from 6^^^ to ^//-fr the refpeBs and ^Mf^/r^ of fuch things as do immedi- ately depend upon his on?;? dominion ; as the /it/6'^ of perfons and tliQ properties of things are 5 and thus God did reveal to Abraham that he fliould go and facrifice his _/(/;?, which had been no murder when done upon God's immediate co?nmand, and for a facrifice to himfelf and therefore w^ould have been jrr^/7- /■^/'/e as a teftimony of entire obedience (which (7^^ did accept ■without the att) and fo the Ifraelites taking the ?^i which * '23! ^^^ looiied at, than the outward obferv at ion of fome Cere- monial precepts y and that God would never accept of that by w^'j of commutation^ fox real md internal goodnefs. UkuCq the Prophets by their own pracl ice ^dXd frequently fliew that the Z^iF of Mofes did not lb indifpenfibly oblige men^ but that God won\d accept of t\\of^ actions which were performed without the regularity required by the Law of Mcfes ; and thus he did of facrificing upon high places^ not only before the building of the I King. 18. 38. T'f^;^^/^^ but fometimes after, as he accepted of the facrific^ of Elijah on Mount Carmel^ even when /;/g;/; /^/^r^j were for- bidden. Which the Jews are become To feriiible of, thaD Fi'd. jarchi in ^^1 grant that a true Prophet may fometimes command fome- Deut. 18. 21. thing to be done in violation of the Law of Mofes^{o he doth Et Vorfi. ad not dr3.w people to Idolatry, nor deftroy the obligation of Af^yfi^ w^/w. ^f /^^/«'. i^jg £^^ But this they reftrain to nyti; ^2^^ fomething done " ^'•^* ^' '^* in cafe of necejfity, ^nd that it (liould not pafs into d. precedent or ^ perpetual Law j and therefore their rule is i^yGlU^ nyiy •»bV bD3 "lb. Tlje Prophet was to be hearkened to in every thing he commanded in a cafe of neceffity. But by this it is clear that the Prophets were not to be tryed by the letter of the Law of Mofes, but by the end and the reafon of it. Thus much I fuppofe will make it clear what rules the people had to try the Prophets do^rine by, without miracles,. C H A P. Chap. 6. the Truth of Scripture- Hijlory afferted \Sy CHAP. VI. The Tryal of Prophetical Prediftions and Miracles. • I' ^he great difficukj of the trjing the truth of prophetical Predi 8 ions from Jer. 1.8. 7, 8, &C.' Some general Hypothefes pre- mi fed for the clearing of it. The fir Jl concerns the grounds- Tvhy Vreditlions are accounted an e%fidence of divine re'uela- tion. 7 hree ConfeSlaries dra7i>n thence. The fecond^ the man- ner of God's revelation of his will to the minds of the Pro* phets. Of the fever al degrees of prophecy. The third ^, that God did not always reveal the internal purpofes of hts ivill unto the true Prophets. The grand (^iiefiion propounded^ How it may he known when Preditfions exprefs God's decrees , and when only the feries ofcaufes. For the fir fi fever al rules laid- down. I. fVhen the prediBion is confirmed by a prefent mi* rack, 2. IVhen the things foretold exceed the probability of . fecond caufes. ^.. When con fir ?md by God^s oath. 4 When the blejfin'gs foretold are purely fptritual. Three rules for in- terpreting the prophecies which refpecl the fixate of things un- der the Gofpel ^.Whenall circuynfiances are foretold. 6. When' many Prophets in fever al ages agree in the fame prediBtons. Vredt^wns do not exprefs God's uttalterahle purpofes , whe^- they only contain comminations of judgments^ or are predi^li- ons of temporal bleffings. The cafe of the Ninevites, Hezekiah,. and others ^opened. Of repentance in God^what it implies. The Jewi(h objeSlions about prediBions of temporal bleffings an' Jwered, In what cafes miracles were expeBed from the PrO' phets : when they were to confirm the truth of their religion, Infiancedin the Prophet at Bethel, Elijah, Elilha ^WMofes^ himfelf; whofe divine authority that it was proved by miracles.^ is demonfirated againfi; the modern Jews ^ and their pretences- anfwered. THE next thing which the rnles of ^ryj/ concerned, was the '^nf i, prediBions of the Prophets. Concerning which God him- felf hath laid down this general ruky Deut. 1 8. 22. wfjen a Pro- phet J]) eaketh in the name of the Lord^ if the thing follow wt y i66 Origines SacnB : Book IL nor come to pafs , that is the thing which the Lord hath not j^o- ken^ but the 'Tophethath^oken it prefmptuoufly \ thoujhalt not he afraid of him, G rot ins underftands this place of the Vrophet's telling the people he would doe fome miracles to confirm his do- ♦ ti:ri?ie j but, faith he, if thofe miracles were not done as hcfaid^ it was an evident demonftration of a falfe prophet. It is certain it was Co ; for then his own ?nouth told him he was a lying prophet \ but thefe vpords feem to refer, rather to (bmething/«- ture than prefent^ and are therefore generally mderfiood con- cerning the truth of prediBions ^ which was a matter of very difficult tryalj in regard of Xhtgoodnefs or the jufiice of God fb frequently interpojmg between the prediBion and the event. That place which makes it fo difficult to difcern the truth of a prediclion by the event, is Jer. i8. 7, 8, 9, lo. At what in- ft ant I fhall ffeak concerning a Nation , and concerning a King- dom, to pluck up, and to pull downy and-deflroy it ; If that Na- tion againfi whom I have pronounced ^ turn from evil^ I will re- pent of the evil I had thought to doe unto them ; And at what in- fiant Ifhalljpeak concerning a Nation, and concerning a Kingdom^ to build and to plant it \ if It doe evil in my fight, that it obey not my voice, then will I repent of the good wherewith I faid I would benefit them. By which place it feems clear, that even after the predictions of Prophets, God doth referve a liberty to himfelf either to repent of the evil or the good that was fore- told concerning any people -, how then can the fidelity of a Pro- phet be difcovered by the event,, when God-m^y alter the event, and yet the Vrophet be a true Prophet I This being a cafe very • intricate and obfcure^ will call for the more diligence in the un- folding of it : In order to which, we (hall firft premife fome general Hypothefes , and then come to the particular refolution of it. The general Hypothefes will be concerning the way and method oi Gods revealing future contingencies to the Prophets, without which it will be impofftble to refolve the particular emergent r^/fj concerning preditiiovs. SeB. 2. The pre did ion of future events is no further an argument of a I Hypoth, prophet ick Spirit, than /m the fore-knowledge of thofe things is fuppofed to be out of the reach, of any created underfi anding , and therefore Gc^r/challengeth this to himfelf in Scripture,^s a pecu- liar prerogative of his ow?2, to declare the things that are to come, and thereby manifeils the Idols of the Gentiles to be no Gods , becaufe Chap. 6. The Truth of Scripture- Hiftory afferted, 167 heeaufe they could not /hew to their worjhippers the things to come i Ifa. 44. 6, 7. From this Hypothejis thefc three Confedaries follow : 1 . That the events which are foretold , muft he fuch as do ex- ceed the reach of any created intellect ; for otherwife it could be no evidence of a Spirit of true Frophecy, fo.that thQ foretel- ling of fuch events as depend upon a feries of natural caufes , or fuch as though they are out of the reach of humane under - ftandingy yet are not of xh^ diabolical ^ ov Tuch things zs fall out cafually true , but by no certain grounds of prediEiion^ can none of them be any argument of a Spirit of Frophecy. 2. That where there were any other evidences , that the Pro- phetfiake by Divine Revelation ; there was no reafon to wait the fulfilling of every particular Frophecy before he was believed as a Frophet. If fo , then many of God's chiefeft Prophets could not have been believed in their own Generations •, becaule their Prophecies did reach fo far beyond them, as Ifaiah^s concern- ing Cyrm^ the Vraphet at Bethel concerning Jofias : and all the Prophecies concerning the captivity and deliverance from it, muft not have been believed till fulfilled^ that is, not believed at all : for when Prophecies are accomplifhed , they are no longer the ohje^s of faith, but of fenfe. Where then God gives other evidences of Divine injpiration^ the credit of the Prophet is not fuj?ended upon the minute accomplifhment of every event fore- * told by him. Now it is evident there may be particular Di- vine revelation of other things befides future contingencies y fb that ifa reafon may be given, why events once foretold may not ♦ come to pafs, there can be no reafon why the credit of any Prophecy (hould be invalidated on that account ; becaufe every event is not exactly correjpondent to the prediBion. It is moft ^ certain that whatever comes under divine knowledge , may be divinely revealed ; for the manifeftation which is caufed by any tight y may extend it felf to all things to which that light is extended : but that light which the Prophet faw by was a di- vine lighty and therefore might equally extend \t felf to all kind of objecisy but becaufe /^/-^/rf contingencies are the moft remote- from humane knowledge , therefore the foretelling of thefe hath httn accounted the great evidence of a true Prophet^ but yet there may be a knowledge of other things in a lower ^/f^re-f than /kzhhering o/Jcroboam'j hand. We cannot there- fore in reafon think that God would fet fo clear d. feal to any deed which he did intend himfelf to camel afterward. 2- FrediBions exprefs God's inward purpofe, when the things foretold do exceed all probabilities of fecond caufes ; in which cafe though thofe words of TertuUian feem very harrti, credo cjuia im- poffibile : yet taking that impcffibility as relating tofeco^id caufes, and the ground oi faith to be ibme divine prediBion , we fee what reafon there may be for them : For the more unlikely the thing is to be ejfetled by fecond caufes, the greater evidence is it, that the Prophets in foretelling it did not refpeB thQ mere or- der of things in the ivorld, but the unalterable counfels of the Ti^ill of God, which therefore would certainly have thdr timely accomplifhments. When therefore any Prophets did foretell things above the reach of natural caufes, and thofe things. dxd not come to pafs, it was a certain evidence of a /'^//^ Prophet, as the contrary was of a rr«e c»^ ; for none could know fb long before-hand fuch things as were above all humane power , but fuch to whom Go^hinifelf, who alone vj^sable to ejf^eB them, did reveal and communicate the knowledge of than. And hence we fee in Scripture thofe prediclions which have feemed to • carry the greateft improbabilities with them, have had the moft punBual accomplijJ}ments,as the Ifraelites returning out of ^^. a thing , that when 6'o^fpeaks of it, he udicrs it in with this ' Preface, Thai he frufirateth the tvkens of the lyers, and maketh thi Chap. 6. The Truth of Scripture Htjlory ajferted. 173 ths deviners rnad^ hut confrmetb the word of hisfervanty and per- formeth the comfel of his meffevgers, that faith to Jerufalem, Tiooufhalt be inhabited^ &c. The more unlikely then the thing was to come to pafs^ the greater evidence there was' in ^o clear 2i prophecy of it "^o long before (above 100 years) and fo ex- aA a fulfilling of it afterwards precifely at the expiring of the LXX years from Xh^frfi Captivity, Frediciions concerning future events, which are confirmed by an g^^^ ^^ oath from God himfelfdo exprefs the immutable determinations of 2^ Gods rr/V/.For which we have the greatefi: affurance we can defire from that remarkable exprejjlon of the Apojlle to the Hebrews^ ^Heb. 6.. 17, 18. Wljerein God willing m.ore abundantly tofhew un- to the heirs of promife the immutability of his counfel^ confirmed it by an oath^ that by two immutable things in which it was im- poffible for God to lye, we might have a firong confolation, &c. Wherein the Apojile obviates and removes all doubts ^nd mijpri- fions, left God after the declaring of his will fhoiald alter the event foretold in it, and that he doth, both by jhewing that God hath made an abfolute promife, and withal to prevent all doubts, left fome tacite condition might hinder performance^ he tells us that God had annexed his oath to it, which twa things were the moft undoubted evidences of the immutabili- ty of God's counfel. The word '^gJcA^/ here ufed, doth in Scri- pture often note the fruflrating of mens hopes and expe Rations ; fo it is u led, Hab. ?. 17. "^gJiT^-m/ %^y>v 1?^clU(/ wq render it th^Jabour of the Olive Jhall fail. So Hof 9. i. jy 5 o/vQ- tr^ivmn etvrh, and the new wine froall fail in her. Thus the meaning here is, that by two immutable things in which it is impqlfible that God (hould frujlrate the expectations of men, or alter the events 0^ things after he had declared them. For God^s oath is an q\- idcnt demonfiration of the immutability of his will in ?i\\ predictions to which this is annexed, and doth fully . exclude that which the Scripture calls repenting in God, that is, doing otherwife than the words did feem to exprefs, becaufeof fom^ tacite conditions und^riiood in them. So w^efind Ffal. 89. 3 !> 3^1 33> 34^ ^5) 3^' . tf i^^y ^^eak my fiatutes, and keep mt my commandments, then will 1 vifit their tranfgreffion with the i^od, and their iniquity with fir ipes ; neverthelefs my loving kind- nefs will I not utterly take from, him, nor faffer my faithfulnefs . to fail) my Covenant will I not break; nor alter the thing that is gon^ iy4 Origines Sacr{S : Book II. gone out: of lips. Once have Ifipom by my holinefs^ that I will not lye unto David, His feed fhall endure for ever, and his throne as the Sun before me. Wherein we fee what way God takes to afifures us of the immutability of his Covenant with his people, by the (?/7/-/? which he adjoyns to his promifes -, where- by God doth moft fully exprefs the unalterable determinations of his own will, in that h^fwears by his own holinefs that he would not lye unto David, I e. that he would faithfully per- form what he had promifed to him. And therefore TertulUan well faith, Beatifumm quorum caufa Deu6 jurat, fed miferi & detefiabiles Ji ne juranti quidem credimns. It is happy for us believing creatures, that God (loops fo low as to confirm his Covenant with an oath -, but it will be fad and milerable for fuch as dare not venture thdv faith upon it, when God hath annexed his oath unto it. It is thought by expofttors, that there is a peculiar emphafis in thole words, Tiyi^^J PlHIb^ Once htvelfworn, thereby noting xhQ irrevocable nature of God's oath, that there is no need oi repetition of it as among men, be- caufe when once God fwears by himfelf it is the higheft demon- firation that no conditions whatever (hall alter his declared /??/r- Conc.T9ht.%. pofe. And therefore the C(?««ci/ of Toledo well explains the different nature of Gods Oath and his repentance in Scriptures \ Jurare namque Dei efi^fe vrdinata nullatenus convellere -, pceni^ fere vero eadem ordinata cum voluerit immntare j God is (aid to fwear when he binds himfelf abfolutely to performance : and to repent, "wh^n things fall out contrary to the declaration of God^s will concerning them ; for fo it muft be undcrftood to be only mutatiofententia, and not confilii, that the alteration may be only in the things, and not in the eternal purpofe of God, But (ince it is evident in Scripture, that many predikions do im- ply (bme tacite conditions, and many declarations of Godl will do not exprefs his internal purpofe s, it itemed necejfary in thofe things which Cod did declare to be the irrevocable purpofes of his 72jill, there fhould be fome peculiar mark and char a tier fet upon them for th€ confirmation of his peoples faith, and this we find to be the anriexing an oath to hhpromifes. Thus it is in that grand Infirument of Teace between God and his people^ the Covenant of Grace, wherein God was pleafed fo far td ftrengthen the faith of his people in it, that he ratifies the arti- cles of peace therein contained, but el^ecially the J^ of Grace, on 4:. 2. chap. 6. The Truth of Scripture-Hijlory ajferted, 175' on his own part with an oath^ thereby to ajjure thera it was never his purpoie to repeal it^ nor to fail of prformance in it. For we are not to think that an Oath lays any greater obligation upon God for ferformance, than the mere declara- tion of his willy it being a part of inmuttahU jufiice^ and confequently necojjarily tmplyed in the Divine nature to per- form fromifes when once made ; but God\ Oath refpedls us and not himfelf^ viz,, that it might be a tefttmony unto us that God's will thereby declared , is his eternal and unchan* geable willy and fo the mercies thereby fromtfsd are fure mer- cies ; fuch as are d.unzifJ.MTa without any repentance en God's ^^* 5^^ 3- fart. FrediBions made hy the Prophets concerning hlejfmgs merely SeB» J, j])iritualy do exprefs God's internal purpofe^ and therefore mufi a have their certain accomplijl^ment in the time prefixed hy the Vrophets, The grand reajon of this Tropofition^ is, that the he[to7ving of bleflngs mtrdy fpiritual^ doth immediately ^ro^^- ^//zr)' at all for that on thefe two accounts ; firft, Jonas thea. would not have been fo unwilling to h^YQ undertaken this mef fage ; for as far as we can fee, the harjhnefs of it was the main reafon he fought to have avoided it by flying to Tarjloijh. Se- condly, Jonas would have had no pretence at all for his anger and dijpleafure at Go/j pardoning Nmsve ; which is mori probably conceived to have been, becaufe the Nmevites^might now. iSa. Origines Sacm : Book II. now fuJpeSf him to be no true Frofhet, bccaufe the evevt an- ivvered not his prediBion, Now there had been no reafon at all for this, if he had mixed /)row//^j together with his threatn'mgs ; for then nothing would have fallen out contrary to his own fre- diBions. And therefore it feems evident that the meffage Jo- nas was fent with , was only the comminatton of their ^eedy ruine , which God did on purpofe to awaken them X\\^fooner , and with the greater eamef^nefs to repentance, when they«^- /»^«^ was denounced in fb peremptory a manner ; although it Jonah 4. 2. feems yo«^ had before fuch apprehenfions of the mercifuU na- ture of God znd his readinefs to pardon, that he might luppolc Ge- cimen of his own /rw/'/? in another Prophecy concerning the ^f^f/; of Hananiah , which was punctually accompliQ-ied the fame year, ver, 17. And which is mofi: confiderable to our purpofe, both thcfe Prophets confidered the fame people under the fame B b circum- 1 86 Origines Sacr^ : Book II. circumftanceSy and with the fame conditions ; and fo Jeremiah^ becaufe of their incorrigibknefs , foretels defolation certainly to Gorae ; notwithftanding this, Hananiah {ovttds peace and fafe^ tyy which was contrary dired^ly to God's method of proceedings and fo the fnlfity of his Prophecy would infallibly be difcovered by the event. So that notwithltanding this infiance it appears evident^ that predicl ions o^ temporal biejfings do fuppofeco«ii/>/- ons^ and fo have not always the 6't/f,^^ fulfilled, when tht peo^ pie do not perform their condition of obedience. And thus we have now laid dov\;n the r?//^/ whereby the truth of Prophecies was to ht judged y by which it appears what little »6'fi the conftant Vrophets had to ^/?f 6*^/ to miracles to manifejl the c^r- ^^/^rjy of Divine revelation in them. So we have finiflied our firil propofition concerning the manner of trying Divine revela- tion in the Vrophets God lent among his people. Seel. 1 5. We now come to the fecond general propofition concerning 2. Prop. the Prophets. Thofe Prophets whom God did imploy upon fome ex^ traordinary mejfage for confirming the truth of the religion efta- blijhed by him , had a power of miracles conferfd upon them in order to that end. So that we mufl: diftinguifh the ordinary employment of Prophets which was either inftruBion or predi- Biono^ future events among God's own people ^ from their /?f- culiar mejfages when they were fent to give evidence to the truth of that ivay of religion which was then fetled by Go£t own appointment. Now the Prophets generally did fuppofe the truth of their religion as owned by thofe they were fent to, and therefore it had been very needlefs, imploying a ipower of mira- cles among them to convince them of that which they believed already. For we never rf^J among all the revolts of the peo- ple of the Jews that they were lapfed fo far as totally to rf- ^f (5/ the X^rr of Aiofes^ ( which had been, to alter the confti- tution of their Commonwealth ) although they did enormoufly efend againfi: the Precepts of it, and that in thofe things where- in the honour of God was mainly concerned , as is moft |)lain in their frequent and grofs Idolatry : Which we are not fo to un- derfland as though they wholly caji off the w or [hip of the true God J but they fuperinduced ( as the Samaritans did ) the wor- fiip of Heathen Idols with that of the God of Ifrael. But when the revolt grew Co great and dangerous that it was ready to fwal- iow up the true worfhip of Gcd , unlels fome ^parent evidence were Chap. 6. the Truth of Scripture- Hijiory ajferted, 187 were given oithtfalfity ofthofe Heathen mixtures^ and fur- ther confirmation of the truth of the efiahlijhed religion^ it plea- fed God fometimes to fend his Prophets on this peculiar meffage to the main infiruments ef this revolt : as is mod confpicuous in that dangerous dejign of Jeroboam^ when he out of a Poli- tick end fet up his tivo calves in offojition to the Temple at Je- rufalem; and therein it was the more dangerous in that in all frohahiUty he defighed not the alteration of the worjhip it felf, but the efiablijhment of it in Dan and Bethel. For his inte- i Klng.n.a?" r^/ lay not in drawing of the people from the worjhip of God ^ but from his wcrjhip at Jerufalem, which was contrary to his deJIgn of Cantoni'z.ing the Kingdom , and taking the greateft J?7^rg to himfelf Now that God might confirm his p^o;)/ej faith in this d^ng^vom juncture of time^ he fends a Frophet to Bethel ^ who by the working of prefent. miracles there, viz,, the renting 1 Kln'^. i"*. 2. the Altar and withering wr^/w an evident demnnjlraticn to common fenje of the ^r//r^ of that religton which is confirmed by them. *yf<^7. i6. And thus we affert it to have been in the cafe o^ Mofes^ the truth of whofe meffage was atteded both among the (t^:g)'pti- ans and the Ifraelites by that power of miracles which he had. But herein we have the great Patrons of Mofes our greatel^ enemies, viz. the prefent Jews ; who by reafon of their enmity to the doBrine oiChrtfi which \v?iSd.ttd\Qd by unparalleud mi- raclesy^vQ grown very (liy of the argument drawn from thence: Infomuch that their great Dr. Maimonides lays down this for Defmd.legts, ^ confident maxime SkT^^ U U'C^H N^V ^^^"I rili;a c. S. f. I. ' P\"imi/ Mofes. Reafons affigned why thofe expreffons are ufed, though perpetuity he not imply- ed. The Law of Mofes not huilt upon immutahle reafon^ hecaufe many particular precepts were founded upon particu- lar occafions^ as the ctiftoms of the Zabii ; many ceremonial precepts thence deduced out of Maimonides ; and hecaufe fuch a ftate of things was foretold^ with which the ohfer* vation of the Ceremonial Law would he inconfifient. That largely dif covered from the Prophecies of the old Tefiament. 1N0W come to the fecond cafe wherein miracles may be 5^^^ j; juftly expecled, which is, 7vhenfomething which hath heen hefore efiahlifiied hy Divine Law^ is to he repealed^ and fome other way of worjhip to he fet up infiead of it. Two things are very neceifary to be fpohn to for the clearing of this pro- p'ftion \ firft, whether a Law once efiahlijlted hy God himfelf be capahle of a repeal ; Secondly, What necejfity there is of miracles tomaniftfi God^s intention of repealing a former Law. Thefe two contain the main foundation of the diffute hctween the 1 yi Origtnes Sacra : Book II. the yeivs and us, I'iz,, 'whether the Law of Mofes tvos ever to be laid afide^ and, 'whether the miracles of cur hlejjed Saviour "ivere fujfaenp evidences of God^s intcntiort, by him to repeal the former Law efiabl/Jhed by Moles ? I begin with th^firfi^ whe- ther a Divine Law in general or the La7i^ of Mofes in particular may be abrogated or reveal edy after God himfelf hath made ^ it evident that the promulgation of it was from himfelf This muft be confeffed the ftrongefi and moft plaujible plea the pre- fent Jews have for their Infidelity, and therefore the eternity of the Law of Mofes is made by them one of the fundamen- tal articles of their prefent Creed^ and is pleaded for with the greateft fubtilty by their great R, Abravanel, who fpends his whole I 5 Chapter de capite fidei upon it, but with what fuc- cefs, will be feen in our clearing of it. There are but three things can hcfuppofed as the grounds why a LawoncQ pro- mulged by God himfelf, fliould not be capable of repeal J and thole are either firft, becaufe the things themfelves commanded ' in that Law are of fuch a nature^ that they are not capable of hi?jg difpenfed with : Or fecondly, that it is not conjifefit Tvith the wifdom of God to repeal a Law once eftablijhed : Or thirdly, that the reafonofthe Law continuing always the fame ^ it would argue mutability in God to revoke that Law, and efta- hliJJj another injlead of it : If we can therefore demonftrate, that the matter of the Law of Mofes is of a pofitive and mutable nature^ that it isfuitable to the wifdom of God to alter />,and that fujpcient account in reafon may h^ given for the alteration ofity Then there can be no imaginable necejfity that a Law once having God for its Author^ muft therefore derive from him an eternal and immutable obligation, SeSt, 1. Y\x^ then as to the matter of the Law ; and here it muft be fuppofed, that in the matter of ccntroverfie between us and the Jews, the qucftion is not of any of thofe thipgs which are ^erefore commanded, becaufe they are mtrinfecally good, as the precepts of the natural or moral Law \ but of thole things which are therefore only good, becaule God commands them^ i e. things merely pofitive, whole worth and value arileth not from the intrivfick weight of the things, but from the exter- nal imprefs of divme authority upon them. Now it is no e]ue- fiion on either hand whether God may require thefe things or no J nor whcthcT thele things will be acceptable unto God, fo long Chap. j\ the Truth of Scrtpture-Hiflory ajferted. 195 long as he recjHires them ; but whether, when once re^^uired^ the obligation to them can never ceafe. Such kind of things among the Jews we fuppofe all the rites and ceremonies of the Law to be ; viz. circumcijion^dillin^ion of meats and days^cu- fioms of facrificing^ and fuch like, and whatever other Laws refpedted them as a difiinB and peculiar Common-wealth. All thefe we fay are fuch as do not carry zn-immutabk obligation along with them j and that on thele accounts. Firft, Becaufe thefe things are not primarily required for r. them/elves, but in order to fome further end. Things that are required upon their own account^ carry an indijpenfable obliga^ rion in them to their performance ; but where things are com' manded not for themfelves, but the Legtflator doth exprefs fome particular grounds of requiring them, there the end and innmion of the Legifiator is the meafure of their obligation.To \^hkhpurpo{t Maimonides excellently fpeaks,when he ikithXhat More Nevock the particular manner of workup amongthe]QWSyas facrifices and p- 3. c. 32. oblations^ were fecundum intentionem fecundam Dei, God^sfe- cundary intention and dejtgn ; but prayer^ invocation^ and the like, were nearer God^s primary intention : Now^ faith hc^ for the fir fi^ they are no further acceptable to God^ than as all the ctrcumfiances of time^ place, and perfons are obferved^ which areprejcribed by God him/elf; but the latter are accep- table in any perfon, time^ or place. And for this caufe foith he, it is that we find the Prophets often reproving men for their too great fedulity in bringing oblations, andinculcaiing this to them, that God did not intend thefe as the principal infiances of his "Worfljip, and that God did not need any of thefe things. So I Sam, 15. 21. Behold to obty is better than facrifice,and to hearken^ than the fat of rams\ Ifa. i. ii. To what purpofe is the multitude of your facrifices unto me ? jaith the Lord, And efpecially ^^rfw?.7. 22, 23. For I [pake not to your Fa- thers, nor commanded them in the' day that I brought them forth cut of the land of zAlgypt, concerning burnt-offerings ; but this thing I commanded them., f^J^^^i Obey my voice, and I Will be your God, andyejhall be my people. Of which WOrds Maimonides faith, Scrupulum mover tint omnibus, quos mihi vtdere aut audire conttgit ; For lay they, How can it be that God^idi not command them concerning facrifices, when a great part of the Law is about them : But Maimonides wjjl refolves the doubt thus, That God's primary intention, and that which Cc he 1^4 Origines Sacra: : Book 11. he chiefly lookeJ atyWas obedience \ hm God^s inte7nion in facri- fices and oblations^ was only to teach them the chief thw^^ "which ^as obedience. This then is of the number of thofe things which are fpoken abfolutely, but to be underftood compara- ti'uely, as, I will have mercy avd not facrifice. My dntfrine is not mine^ but hi: that lent me. It is not you that fpc^kj but the Holy Ghofi^ &:c.-So that we fee all the goodnefs which is in thefe things ^ is conveyed into them by tha*- which is m rally goody which is obedience j and God did never regard the per- formance of thole La7i^s diuy farther than as it was an expref- fion of obedience^ and it was conjoyned with thole other moral duties which were moft agreeable to the Divine nature. And in this fence many underftood that difficult place ^ Ezek.20.25. A7td I gave ihem lD'^DID )^'U^^T\ftatutes that were not good ^ i, e. fay they, comparatively with tJxfe things which werefim- ply and in themfelves good ; to which purpole they give this rule. Alicfuid Jiegatur ineffe alicui^ ^uod alterius comparatione exifiimatur extguum. But I rather think that which the Chaldee Faraphrafi fuggefts, and others explain further, to be Xht meaning of th^t place, viz. that by the precepts that were not goody is meant the cruel and tyrannical impojitions of thole enemies God for their fins did deliver them over to, which were far from being acceptable to them, which is frequently the fence of good in Scripture, Thus we lee one reajon why the ceremonial precepts do not in themfelves imply an immutable obligation yhQC'dufQ they are not commanded for themfelves, but in order to a further end. Seel. 5. Becaufe God hath frec^usntly difpenfcd with the ceremonial 2. precepts when they were in great efi force ^ if the end of them could be attained without them. Thus the precept of circum- cifionflept during the Ifraelites travels in the wildernefs. Thus Exod 20 •x'x ■^^'^^^ ^te of tht fiew-bready which is exprefly forbidden in the Law ; the Jews think to evade this by diftinguifliing be- tween the bread of confeffion in the Eucharifiical offering men- tioned Leviticus 7. 13. and the proper fljew-bread : Now they fay David eat only of the firff, and not of the fecond ; but this is gloffj Aurelianenfisy which overthrows the Text ; ' for it is exprefly faid, that the ground why the Pnefi gave him holy bread , was becaufe there was n'ne there but Dnb' ilD"^ } iiil-^t he fhew- bread, i Sam. li. 6. A like violation of the Law witnout reproof, is commonly fuppofed by the Jews to have /' chap. 7. The Truth of Scripture- Hiflory afferte^. ipf have been in the (lege 0^ Jericho ^u, in the cafe of the Sabbath. But it is more plain in thztAnamalous Vajjo^er obferved by Hez^ekiah, which many oithcJeTi^s themfelves acknowledge -was not obferved as thQfecond P^j//oi/er provided by the LaTi/ to be celebrated on tho, 14 day of the fee o?id month by thofe who were debarred of the fir (i" for their legal uncleannefs\ but Numb. 9. ir, they fuppofe it to have been intended for the legal Vaff- over ; only becauie the fourteenth of Kifan was fa^jed before the fan^ification of the Temfle was finijhed, left they (hould ^ Chron. 29. celebrate none at all that/^^r, they tell us that Hez,ekiah with '^" 'the confent of the Rulers^ did make an Intercalation th^t year of a whole month, and Co Nifan was reckoned for the fecond Adar, and J/^r for Nifan, from whence they lay that Hez>e- ^- SeUen.de kiah did intercalate Nifan in JVi/^??, that is, added another ^^^^ ^^'^'^* Nifan to the j?r/. But where do we read any fuch thing ^^r- * ^^^' ^' mitted in the L^w' as the celebrating the /r/? Fafjo'ver the 14th of thQ fecond month? But granting that it was obferved as ^ fecond Faffo'uer, becaufe of the want of legal fanclifica- tion both in Vriefis and People ; yet we find great irregularities in the cbfervation of it ; for it is exprefly Cd.idiJ'hat a muhltude 2 Chron. 30. of the people had not cleanfed them/elves, yet they did eat the if. Faffover otherwife than it was written. And yet it is faid upon Hezekiah's prayer, that the Lord hearkened to Hezekiah, V. 20. and healed every one. So that we fee God himfelf did dif fenfe with the ftrift ceremonial precept so^ the Law, where men did look after the main iind fubfiantial parts of the worflyip God required from them. Nay God himfelf hath exprefly ^e- - dared his own will to difpenfe with the ritual mdtceremonial Law, where it com«6 to ftand in competition with luch things as have an internal goodnefs in them, when he faith, he defi- pj^^ ^ ^^ red mercy and not facriflce, and the knowledge of God more than burnt-offerings. Thus we plainly fee that the ceremonial La7if, how QVQV po/uive it was,did yield as to its ob ligation, whm any thing that was moral, flood in competition W'ith it. And fo the Jews themfelves fuppofe an open violation of the jh- dicial Law to have been in t\\ ^^ ^' ^"'^fi^'^^ ^^^^^ ^S)^^ *^0 troubled at this, that he wijh- c. i^. eth that f lace ir^Sm :j.q\ expunged out of Scripture^ that the name of God might he fant^ified. But whether this were done 'nj"''^n 'ii ^y, hy the command of the Oracle or no, or whe- ther only by a general fermljfion^ we fee it was acceptable unto God\ for upon thatth^ Gibeonkes famine was removed, and God was intreated for the Land, Thus we have now proved that there is no immutable and mdifpenfable obligation which arifeth from the things t hem/elves. ^ SeB.4. Secondly, It isno way inconfiftent with the wifdom of God to repeal fuch a Law when once efiablijljed. The main argu- - ment of that learned R. Jbravanel, whereby he would efta- ^.13. ^^^^^^' bliih the eternity of the Law of Mofes,\s fetched from hence. That this Law was the refult of the wifdom of Godpvho knows thefuitablenefs of things he appoints to the ends he appoints them for \ as God hath appointed bread to be the food of mans body : Now we are not to encjuire why God hath appointed bread and no other thing to be the food of man ; no more, faith he, are 'we to encjuire why God hath appointed this Law rather than another for the food of our fouls ; but we are to refi contented with the counfels of God, though we underfland not the reafons of them. This is the fubftance of that argument, which he more largely deduceth. To which we anfwer, that his argument holds good for obedience to all God^s pofiti-ve precepts of what kind or nature foever they be, fo long as we know their obli- gation to continue ; but all the quefiion is, whether every po-- fitive precept mud always continue to oblige. And thus far his fimilitnde will hold good, that whatever God doth command ^^ we are to look upon it to be as necejjary to our fculsy as bread to our bodies ; but hence it follows not that our fouls muft be always held to the fame pofitive precepts^ any more than our bodies to Xh^ fame kind oi food. Nay, as in our bodies we find fome kin^ of food always neceffary, but the kind of it to alter according to age, health, and conjlitutions ; fo we fay fbme kind of Divine revelation is always necejfary ; but God isgracioufly pleafedto temper it according to thQ age and growth of his people ; fo he fed them as with milk in their non- age^ with a ritual and ceremonial Law^ and trained them up by chap. 7. The Truth of Scripture- Hiflory ajjerted, 1 9 7 • by degr ees under the Nurfery of the Prophets 'till the Church was grown to agCy and then God fed it with thcfiro^ig meat which is- contaimd in God's revelation of his will by tlie Gofpel of his ^^i^t?. And therein was abundantly feen God^s mKvm>UiKQ- ^^ict, his variegated wifdom^ that he made choice of fuch excelknt and proportionable ways to his peoples capacity to prepare them gradually for that full and compleat revelation which was re- ferved for the time of the appearance of the /r/el, and lay them in the balance with thofe of the Ceremonial LaWy and if he makes any fcru- pie oi decidinir on which lide tlie over-weight lies, we may have caufe to fiilt>eli him forjaken of that little reajim which gave liim the natne of wan. Let but the fifth of Matthew be laid againft the whole book of F.eviticmy and then fee whether contains the more excellent precepts^ and more fuitable to the Divind nature ? 1 fpeak not this to dijjmrage any r/;/>/i:( which had once 6W for the Author of it, but to let us fee how far . God was from the necefjhy o{ natural agents to aQ to the height of his ftrcngth in that difcovery of his ///Vi^. (7^/-/ is TT^z/t' as well as righteom in all his ways ; as he can command nothing but what was juft 5 (c) he will cominand nothing I)ut what is goody nay excellent in its y^/W. But though all the Stars be in the fnne firmament ^ yet one flar differs from another in gh- ry •, though they may be all pearls^ yet f()me may be more orient than (Others are j every place oi holy Scripture may have its crowny but fbme may have their aureola ^ a greater excel- lencyy a fuller and larger capacity than the other liath ; every par(el of Divine revelation may have fome perfiiion in its A'-TZr/, yet there may be Ibme monftra perfctlionis in Scaliger^ txpreliiion, that may far out-vye the glory and ex-an we think the mifls and utnbragcs of the L/i/p could ever c/7// lb gjoriom a //(c/^/" as the Sun of righteoufnefs hiiufclf in his Meridian elevation? As well may we think a dark JJjady pajfage more magnificent and gloriom than the moll Frincely lUilace^ a pitfurc drawn in Charcoal \no\x exquifite and curiom than the lines of /fpelles ^ fomc imperfeU rudiments more exatl and accurate than the molt elaborate work^ as go ^/'d;;/? to compare the A^/ip of yl^/^'T?'/ with the GoJjk'I of 7'^!/'^'^ CZ/r/// in point of excellency and perfetfiofj. Let the Jt'JFi then boalt never ib w«c// of their ^^^r/'/f/z/j Mofiicus^ and how much it exceeds the r/r/^rcf of revelation in other Prophets^ we /^z/f^rp if his //((/'/■ be compared with what the c;^)^>'^7 communicates, A//{/t'i liimfeif faw but as in a glafs darkly ^ and not in Jhruh lucido. Cliap. 7. The Truth of Scripture- Hijlory averted 199 hcldoy as the Jews' zx^ wont to fpcak. Wc honour Mofes mnchj but we have lejrfit to honour him at whofc tninsfigH- ration he was prefent more \ neither can that be thought any difparagemmt to him who accounted the reproach of Chrifi greater riches than the treafures of iyl'gjpt. But it may be^ though the Law in itsfelf he not fo abfohitely ., ., perfect^ yet God may have declared he will never alter it, and ^ ' ' then it is not confiflent with Divine wifiom to repeal it. Very true : God will never alter what he hatli faid he will not, but where is it that he hath thus bound up himfelf ? Is it in that noted place to this purpofe, Thou flmlt not add thereto nor q^^j. ,2 diminijh from it f So indeed Maimonides argues ; but therein Defundl'ej^.c.i^. more like a Jew than himfelf; and yet one of his own Nation f i. ikkarhft, therein far more ingenuous than he, gives a molt fufficient an- ^- 3- (- »4' fvver to it, which is 7?. Jof Alho, whole words are thus pro- duced by Vorfiius and others ; the Scripture only admonijheth uSy that we jhould not add to nor diminifl) from God^s commands according to our own wills j but what hinders, faith he but God himfelf may according to his own wifdom add or diminijh what he pleafcth f But are they in good earnell when they fay God bound up himfelf by this fpeechi* whence came then ail the Vrophetical revelations among the Jews ? did tiiefe add no- thing to the Law of Mofes, which was as much the will of God wlien revealed by them , as any thing was revealed by A/i^ye-i- himfelf ? or will they fay that all thole things vjqix contained for the fubflance in the Law of Mofes, as to what concerned VraHice ? Very true ; but not in the Ceremonial, but the Moral Law ; and fo we lliall not (tick to grant that the whole duty of man may be reduced to that. But if ad- ding to the precepts be the doing of Gods commands in another way than he hath prefer ibed, and diminijhing from them be mere- ly not to do what God hath commanded, as fome conceive, then thefe words are ftili more remote from the fence aflixcd on them by the incredulous Jews, For why may not God \umCd( add to his own Laws or alter the form of them, although we arc always bound dire(ftly to follow God's declared will ?'■ May not God enlarge his own will, and bring his Scholars from the ru- diments of their nonage to tlie liigher knowledge of thofc who avQ full-grown ? or mu(t the world of neceffity do that which the old Roman fo much abhorred, fenefcere in dementia, wax gray aoQ O'rigines Sacne : Book IL gray in learning this A^ B^ C ? or was the Ceremonial Law like the China Chara^ers, that the iPorld might fpend its age in conning of thertl ? But it appears that there was no other meaning in that ftrid prohibition^ than that men fhould not of their own heads offer to find out new ways of worjhip as Jero- boam did, but that God^s revelation of his own >/// in all its different degrees was to be the adequate rule of the way and parts of his i?w?» worjhip. And I w-ould fain know of the Jews Whether their own fev€re and ftriB prohibitions of thingT not at all forbidden in the Laiv of God, and that on a religi^ ous account, as n"Tin^ y^^D a boundary to the Law, come not nearer the adding to God^s Law, than 'God% own further i^r/^- ration of his tp/Y/ doth ? All the ^///??; npn afiatute for ever\ and that of the ?af vver^ Exod. 12. 17. where the fame exprejfion is ufed. From hence they inferr that no alteration can happen as to the Cere- monial Law, fince God himielf hath declared that it (hall conti- nue for ever. To this common argument of the 7^»^j, it is in general replied, That the word in which the main force of the argument lies, doth not carry with it an abfolute perpetuity, but it fignifics according to Xh^fubjeB it is joyned with. So when it is applied to God, it fignifies Eternity, not fb much from the mere importance of the word, as from the necejfary exiftence of the Divine nature. Thence Maimonides himfelf can fay, Froinde fciendum eft quod Olam non necejfario fignifcet More Mevock dternitatem^ nifi ei conjungatur Ed ("ly vel "iy) id que vclpofi- p- i- ^' ^8. illud ut Olam vaed, vel ante Ad Olam, Although tlils rule of his hath no certainty at all in it, as appears /r(???i his colle^ion of it, which is b'ecaufe it is laid, TfaL 10. 16. The Lord he is King Olam vaed, for ever and ever: but as I faid already, that is not from the fignification of the word, but the nature of the thing. And it is moft plain in Scripture that L:D'7iy is fo far from implying a nccQ^favy perpetuity, that it is applied to fuch things as can have no long duration, as Exod, 21, 6, and he /hall ferve him abiy^, that is, ( as the Jews themfelves expound it) to the next Jubilee, though it were near or far off. So I Sam. I. 22. where Samuel is faid to abide before the Lord Q^iy iy for every where we find Maimonides his Ad Olam in a fence very far (hort of Eternity ; this is fb plain that the formerly cited R. Jofeph Albo doth in terms confefs it , and produceth a multitude of other places to the fame purpofe. For which though he be fufficiently cenlured by his Brethren, yet we may fee there may be fome ingenuity left in a Jewijh Rabbi y even in the grand difpute concerning the Eternity of the Law of Mofes. All the difficulty now is to ajftgn fbme rational accounts seB 8. why fuch precepts which God did not intend (hould be always obligatory, yet (hould be enforced upon them- in fuch exprejfions which may feem at leaft to imply d. perpetuity. Of which thefe may be given . Firft , That thefe precepts to which thefe ex- prejfions are annexed, (hould not be looked on a^ mere ambulatory Laws that did only concern them in their travels through the wildernefs, and not continue obligatory when they were fetled in D d Canaan. 2,02» Ofigines Sacra : Book II. Canaan, For which purpofe we are to obferve, That though all the Laws were given in one body in the wUdernefs^ yet the obligation to all of them did not commence at the fame time^ neither were they to continue for the fame duration \ thefe three forts oi precepts may be obferved among them j firft fuch zs concerned them only in tlmr prefent condition^ as that about the Tabernacle^ which was then a moveable Temple among them, fuitabk to their condition ; but when they were fetled, God was to have a fetled Z^^j^f/^ too. So that precept of going xvithout f/;^ r^w/?, Deut. 13. ii. had an immediate refpett to their peregrination. Secondly^ Such precepts as were given them, but they were not bound to perform them 'till their fettlement m Canaan^ oa driving out the Canaanites, Numb. 33.51. build- ing the Temple in the place which God fbould choofe, ere^ing ju- dicatories in their fever al Cities^ choofing a Kingj Sec. Thirdly^ There were fuch precepts as concern them where ever they were, whether in the tvildernefs or in Canaan ; now thefe are •• the precepts which are faid to be perpetual. This is the ac- De Verit. Rel count given of it by H, Grotim ; but becaule this may be 11- c/jrifi, i.sJ.j. a|)ie tQ fQ^Q exceptions^ I therefore add, Secondly y That the reafbn of thofe expreffions being annexed to the precepts of the Ceremonial Law, is, becaufe they were to continue obliga- tory 'till fuch a remarkable period of time came which jhould alter the fiate of things among them. And fuch a period of time the coming of the Mefftas is by th^mklvcsfuppofed to be, when in their famous computation they make three Epocha^s, before the Law^ under the Law, and the coming of the Aleffioi, And it is evident yet by them, that they do ftill expert a wonder- full alteration of the State of things when the Meffias comes ; doth it not therefore ftand to reafon that uD^^iyv fliould be added to fuch things which were to continue 'till fo great an alteration as (liould be on the coming of the Meffim^ efpecially if the coming of the Meffias had been deferred fo long as they falfly fuppole it to be ? But however, granting that a new feries of times or aJav is to comm.ence from the AdeJjJas^ there is very great reafon why that expref/ion fhould be added to thofe things which were to continue as long as the a.\a>v did, i.e. 'till Meffias came y which we freely acknowledge. And in this fence is ab*iy often taken for fuch a duration of things which had fome remarkable period to conclude it, as in the cafe chap. 7. The Truth of Scnpture-Hiflory ajjerted, 203 cafe of the7;<^/7ef, in the y^rw;^/- mentioned, and the fpecial employment which God. called Samuel to, in this cafe, as to the events or the ^«i of his life in Hannah^s deftg?iation^ when fhe faid he flioiflld attend upon the Lord for ever. Thirdly^ Thefe precepts are faid to 6'»^//', for inlarging the hounds of G(?^V inheri- tance, and making the uttermofi parts of the earth Im Son's poffejjion. Can we then think that the Law which came after- wards, could difanull the Covenant made^'^o years before, as the Apofile excellently reafons ? Can we believe the Mofai- q^^ j* cal difpenfation was the utmfi o( what God did intend, when God had before promfed that the bleffing of Abraham Jhould eome upon us Ventiles alfo ? To which purpofe it is very ob- lervable, that Abraham was jujlifted not in circumcifion, hut in uncircumcifion -, far he received the fign of circumcifion, a ^^^^ ±\oii. feal of the righteoufnefs of faith, being uncircumcifed, that he might be the Father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcifed', that righteoufnefs might be imputed unto them alfo. Whereby it is evident that the great bleffings promifed- to Abraham , did not refpeft him merely as Progenitor of the Ifraelites , but in a higher capacity, as Father of the faithfull ; and that the ground of his acceptance with God did not depend on any Ceremonial Rite, fuch as circumcifij?i was., God imputing his faith for righteoufnefs before his be- ing 2ro8 Orightes Sacras : Book II. ing c'lrcumcifcd. But bccaufe the tirr.e was not yet come wherein the grand myftery of mzns falvation by the death of the Sofi of G(?i was to be revealed ; therefore when God called the Nation of the y^rr/ from their bondage, he made c/;(?i(r^ of a more obfcure way of reprefenting this my fiery to r/^fw through all the umbrages of the Z^rr? : And withall in- forced his precepts with fuch terrible fanStions of c«r/ei to ^// t/^j^ continued not in all that was written in that Law to do It , to make them the more apprehenfeve that the ground of their acceptance with God^ could not be the performance of the precepts of that Law, but they ought to breathe af- ter that higher difpenfation wherein the way and method of ?;w«V falvation (liould be fully revealed when the fulnefs of time was come. Now therefore God left them under the Tu- torage and Pedagogy of the Law, which fpake fb feverely . to them, that they might not think this ja^as all God intended in order to the happinefs of men, buttliat he did referve fome greater thing m ft ore to be enjoyed by his people when they were come to age, Selh 1 2. So that though the Ceremonies of the Law had not a w(?«t^ to ^f^;^ out Chrift \ yet they had a /;^Z3J to pely he fet upon the hells of Hor- ^ach. 14. fes^ and that the pots in the Lord's houfe fhould he as howls be- fore the Altar^ i. e. that when the Le^itical fervtce (hould be laid afide, and that Holinefs which was that appropriated to the Vriefis and Infiruments of the Temple^ (hould be difcerned in thofe things which Teemed moft remote from it. That a Priefihood ajter another order than that of Aaron jljould he Pfal. no. 4,5-, efiahlijhed^ viz. after the order of Melchifedcck j and that he ^' that was the Vriefi after this order^jhould judge among the Hea- then^ and wound the heads over many Countries ; that in the Verf 3. day of his power the people fhould (not be frighted to obedience with thunder-claps^ and earth- quakes^ as at Mount Smai ) but fhould come and yield themfelves as a free-will offering unto him, and yet their number be as great as the drops of the dew which difitU in the morning. That God out of other Nations Ifa. 66. ar. 'ivould take unto himfelf for Priefis and for Levites ; that ^he-^^^- ^- 7- defre of all Nations ^oould ff)eedily come ; that the Meffenger ^ • 3- •*• of the Covenant (hould. come into his Temple ; nay, that feventy weeks ar^ determined upon thy people y and upon thy holy City \ that then the vtfion and prophecy Jhould he fealed up ; that the Sacrifice and Oblation floould he caufed to ceafe\ that the City Dan. 9. 24,2^5, and the San5luary fljould he defirojed, and the end thereof jhall 27- be with a flood, and unto the end of the War defolations are de- termined; that after threefcore and two weeks MelTias jJjculd be cut off^ hut not for himfelf \ that hy htm tranfgreficn jhould be finished ^ and reconciliation fcr iniijuity jhould he made , and everlafimg righteoufnefs (Iwuld h: brought i7i. And left all thele things fhould be apprehended to be onl> a higher advancing of the Levitical wcrjhip , and the way of external Ceremonies^ God exprefly faith , that he would make c new Covenant with the houfe of Ifrael, and with the houfe p/ Judah ; not according *o Jer.3 1. 31,32. ihe Covenant that I made with their fathers, m the dcy I took them hy the hand to hrmg them oi:t cf the Land of zy£gypt , which my Covenant they brake , although 1 was an husband- to them, faith the Lord : But this jJjail he the Covenant th^a I 7mll make with the houfe of Ifrael after thvfe days , faith the E e Lord \ ijO- Origines Sacra: Book IL Lori\ I will fut my La*w in then inward parts , and write ir in their hearts^ and wili he their God, and they (Ijali be my peo- fie. Can any one that now confiders ferioufly the (late of things thus deicribed as it (hould come to pafs , ever imagine that the Levitical fervice was ever calculated for this Stated Was God's Workup to be confined to his Temple at JerufaUm^ when aU the Nations of the eArth Jhotild come to fer^e him I Was the Htgh-priefi to make an atonement there, when an order of Priefl-hood different from the Aaronical fhould be let up ? Muft the Tribe of Le^i only attend at the Temple y - when God ihowld take Vriefis and Levites out of all Nations that few e him? What would become of the Magnificence and Glory of the Temple , when both City and SanBuary fhall be deftroyed^ and that muft be within few prophetical weeks af- ter the Mejftas is cut off ? And muft the Covenant God made with the Ifraelttes continue for ever, when God exprefly faith, he would make a New One^ and that not according to the Co* tenant which he made with them then ? It is fo evident then,, as nothing can well be more , that under the Old Te (lament , fuch ^fiate of Religion was defcribed and promifed, with which the Levitical 2i^or/i[j/p would be mconfiftent 'y and fo that the Ce- remonial Law was not at firft efiablijhed upon an immntabU reafon^ wliich was the thing to be proved* CHAE Chap. ?. the Truth ef Scripture- Hijlory ajferteet. tii CHAP. vm. General Hypothefes concerning the Truth of the Dodlrine of Chrift. ihe great frejuJice aga'wfi our Saviour among Jews and Hea^ thens , was the meannefs of his afpearance. The difference of the miracles at the delivery of the Law and GoJ}feL Some general Hyfothefes to clear the fuhferviency of miracles to the Dotirine of Chrift, i . That where the truth of a doBrine ■defends not on evidence^ but authority^ the only way to prove the truth of the DoBrine^ is to prove the Teftimony of the Re- vealer to be infallible. Things may be true which depend not on evidence of the things. What that is , and on what it de- fends. The uncertainty of ?iatural knowledge. The exiftence of Gody the foundation of all certainty. The certainty of matter of faith proved from the fame principle. Our know- ledge of any thing fuppofeth fomething incomprehen/ible. The certainty of faith as great as that of knowledge ; the grounds of it ftronger. The confiftency of rational evidence with faith, Tet objeBs of faith exceed reafon\ the abfurdities following the contrary opinion. The uncertainty of that which is called reafon, Philofophical dilates no ftandard of reafon. Of tranfubftantiation and ubiquity^ ^c. why rejeBed as contra- ry to reafon. The foundation of faith in matters above rea- fon. Which is infallihle Teftimony ; that there are ways to know which is infallible^ proved, i. Hypoth, A Divine Teftimony the moft infallible. The refolution of faith into God^s veracity as its formal objeB, 3 . Hypoth. A Divine Teftimony may be known^ though God jpeak not immediately , Of inspiration among the Jews , and Divination among the Heathens. 4. Hypoth. The evidences of a Divine Teftimony muft he clear and certain. Of the common motives offaithy and the obligation to faith arifing from them. The original '^of Infidelity. HAving now cleared that the Law of Mofes was capable of Se^. f. a repeal^ I come to the fecond enc^uiry^ Whether the mira^ cles of our Saviour did give a fufficiem evidence of his power and £ e 2 autho" » zi£ Orighes Sacri^e : Book 11. authority to repeal it, I fliall not (to prevent too large an ex- curfion ) infift on any other evidences of our Saviour'^ being. the promiied Mejjia^^ but keep clofe to the matter of our pre- fent debate concerning the evidence which arifeth from fuch cT power of Miracles as our Saviour had in order to his eftablifh- ing that doBrine which he came to pubHfli to the world. The great ftumbling-block in reference to our blelled Saviour a- mong both the Jews and learned Heathens , was the meanneJS of his appearance in the world , not coming attended with that ftate and magnificence^ which they thought to be i7ifeparable from fo great a perfon. The Jews had their fenfes ib j?ofefed with the thundrings and lightnings on mount Sinai^ that ttiey could not im.agine the ftruBure of their Ceremonial worjhip could be taken down with kfs noife and terrour than it was ere^ Bed with. And withall colletUng all thofe pafages of the Old' Teframent which feemed to foretel fuch glorious thi7igs of the days of the Mejfia^^ (which either referr to his fecond coming, or muft be underftood in 2iJ}>iritual jence) they having their minds opprejfed with thQ fenfe of their ^rtiknt calamities, applied them whof/y to an external greatnefis, whereby they might be delive^ red from, the Tyranny of the Roman power. The Heathens, as appears by Celfm and others , thought it very ftrmige that the Son of God fhould appear in the world with fb little grandeur^ and have no greater Train than twelve fuch oh^cuvQ per fi)ns as jfud.Orig.il. ^^^ ^poftles were. For, faith C^/>5, sv^t?? o ma/©- Wi'?** tw aa- ;^S • y^j r^^ .V?//?, which enlightens all other things, dothfirft dif- cover himfelf, fo it was fitting the Son of Gad jhould doe when he Appeared to the world. And fo we fay he did to all fuch whofe minds were not blinded through ohflinacy and wi If ull ignorance. For although this Son of righteoufnefs was pleafed for the bet- ter carrying on his defign in. the world to wrap up himlelf in a ' cloud, yet \\\s glory could not be confined within it, but did break through that dark veil of his humane nature, and did difcover it felfm a moft c/e^rand convincing manner. His appearances indeed^ were not like thofe upon Mount Sinai , becaufe his defign was not to amufe men with the glory of his Majefty, and to terrifie them from Idolatry, (which was a great realbn of thofe dread- full phenomena at the delivery of the Law) but he came to draw all men to him by th^ power and energy of \\\%Grace, and there- -• ' ' fcre chap. 8 . 7^^ Truth of Scripture- Hiflory averted. 2 ry fare afford them all rational conviBions in order to it. And therefore tl|e quality of our Saviours miracles was confideratle as well as t\\^ greatnefs of them. The intent of them all was to do good^ and thereby to bring the world off from its fin and folly ^ to tht embracing of that holy doBrine which he came to pub- lirti to the world. Now that fiich a power of miracles in our Saviour had the SeB^ ^. greatefl: fublerviency to the giving full and convincing evidence that he was the /^^rj^A? he declared hirafelf to he^ and that his dotirine was thereby fo clearly attefted, that it was nothing but objlimcy ^ which could withhold ajfent ^ will appear by thefe following Hypotheies which I lay down in order to the pro- ving it. Where the truth of a do Brine depends not on the evidence of i. Hjpt^,. the things themfelves, but on the authority of him that reveals ity there the only way to prove the doBrine to be true, is to prove the Tefiimony of him that revealed it to be infallible. Several things are neceifary to be proved for the clearing this propofitiom I. That it is not repugnant to reafon that a doBrine fhould he true which depends not upon the evidence of the thing it felf. By evidence of the thing I underlland fo clear and dijiinvt a percep- tion af it, that every one who hath the ufe of his rational facut- tieSj cannot but upon th^firfi apprehenfion of the terms yield a certain affent to it ; as that the whole is greater than apart ; that if ' •^• we take away equal things from equal., the remainder mufi be equal. Now we are to obferve, that as to all thele coinmon notices o( hu- mane nature which c^rry fuch- evidence with them, the certain- ty of them lies in thQ propofition as it is an aB of the mi?2d ab- firachd from the things themfelves-y for thefe do not fuppofe the exifience of the things ; but whether there be any fuch thingy in the world or no as whole or parts., the nnderftanding is ajfu- red that the Idea of the whole carries more in its representation' than that of a part does. This is the great reafon of the cer- tainty and evidence of Mathematical truths.., not as fome imagine, becauie men have no inter efi ^ or defign ., in thofe things , and therefore they never quefiion them, but becaulc they /r^^c^^i not upon fenfeble but abjlratled matter^ which is not liable to fo ma- ny doubts dstht other is ; for that a Triangle hath three Angles BO man quefiions; but whether fuch fenfible parts of matter Hjake ^Triangle^ may be very queftionable. Now that the truth A 14 Origines Sacra : Book II. of beings^ or the certainty ofexiflence of things cannot be fb cer- tain as Mathematical demonfirations^ appears from hence : be- cauie the manner of conveyance of thefe things to my mind can- not be fo clear and certain as in purely intelleBual operations , abfira[fed from exiftem matter. For the higheft evidences of the exiftence of things muft be either the judgment of y^«/^, or f/^^r a/; y?;^r J above things of fenfe or prefent enjoy- ment ) yea, though' the objecl s of it be never fo remote from either^ chap. 8. The Truth of Script ure^Hiflory afferted, iiy either, yet where there \%fujjicient e'vidttjces of divine revela^ tion, faith boggles at no difficulties^ but is firmly refol'ved that that God who hath revealed thefe things , can and will bring therrt to fafs in his own time. There is not then any fuch con- trariety between the foundation oi faith and km-wledge^ as the Schoolmen have peffuaded the world ; we fee both of them proceed on the lame foundation of certainty ; all the difference is, faith fixeth on the veracity of 6"^ J immediately in reference to a divine tefiimony ; knowledge proceeds upon it^ fuppofing no divine revelation as to the things it doth difcover. We hence inferr, that if the certainty of our knowledge de- ^^(F/. 5. pends on this principle, that GoJ will not fuffer us to be decei- 3. ved , /^/^^w u'e are bound to believe whatever God doth reveal to us^ though we may not be able to comprehend the nature of the things revealed. For as to thefe things, w^e have the fkmt ground of certainty which we have as to any natural caujes, for as to them, we novj fuppofe from the former principle, that fetting ajide the exifience o^God, VJQ could have no certainty of them, but that tht formal reafon of out certainty is rc/o/'i;^*^ into this, that God's goodnefs will not fuffer the underftanding to be decei- ved as to thefe things ; the fam.e I fay as to fpiritud myfie- - ries revealed by God-, the ground of OUV certainty \ks not in the evidence of the things, but in the undoubted veracity of God, who hath revealed them. All that I can imagine poiTible to be replied to this, is. That God's veracity ajjures us in natural cau- ses that we are not deceived, only where 7ve have a clear and diftin5l perception of the things , but now in matters above our reafon to comprehend, there can be no clear and diftinEt psrcepti' en. To this 1 anfwer^ Firfi, It is evident in the foundation of all certainty of know- j^ ledge, that there may be^a clear and difiinci perception of that which we cannot comprehend^ viz. of a bet?ig abfolutely perfetl ; for if we have not a c/e^rand difiinh perception of God, thQ foun- dation of all certainty is dcdroved, whic'i is the neceffary ex- ifience of fuch a being ; and he that (hall fay he cannot have a clear perception of God without comprehending him, doth con- 'tradiB himfelf ; for if he be a being infinite, he muft be incom- prehenfihle ; therefore there may be clear perception, where the objecl it felf is above our capacity ^ Now whatever foundation there is in nature for fuch a perception without Qomprehenfion ; F f that 2X5 ' Origines Sacra^ : Book II. that and much more is there in fuch things as are re'veakd by God^ though above our apprehenjion : For the Idea.of God up- • on the Jhtil of ?^an cannot be lb firong an evidence of the ex- ifience of a ^e/wg- above our apprehen/Ion , aS the revelation of matters of faith is, that we fliould believe the ri?iw^i fb revea- led though our under ft an dings lofe themfelves in ftriving to rf^cZ* the natures of them, and the manner of their exiftence. '" a» Secondly^ That which is the only/c/^f 2/^e ^^ /^ imbrace^othing for trttth^ though divinely revealed^ but what our reafon is able to comprehend as to the nature of the things and the manner of its exiftence \0Xi which account the ^ri?r/;ze of the Trinity^ Incarnation^ Satisfathon^ and conlequently the whole myftery of the Gifpd oiChriftmu^i be rejected 2i% incredible ^ and that on this bare pretence^ becaufe although many expreffions in Scripture feem to import all thcfe things, yet we are bound to in- terpret them to another fence^ becaufe this is incongruous to our reafon. But although Chriftianity be a Religion which Comes in the highefl: Ti^ay of credibility to the minds oimen^ although we are wot bound to believe any thing but what we have fuffici- tvitreafcn to make it appear that it is revealed by God^y^t that any thing fliould be queftwned whether it h^oi divine revela- tion^ merely becaufe our reafon is to feek , as to the full and : adi^cjuate conception of it, is a moft abfurd and unreafonable- pretence : And the Aflertors of it muft run themfelves on thefe unavoidable abfurdities. J . Fir ft , Of believing nothing cither in nature or Religion to be true^ but what they can give a full and jatJsfaBory account of^ as to every mode and circumftance of it. Therefore let fuch perfons firft try themfelves in all the appearances of nature ; and \ yfi- then we may fuppofe they will not believe that the Sun fliines, till they have by demonftrative arguments proved the undoubted truth of the Ptolomaick or Copemican hypcthefis ; that they will never give credit to the flux and reflux of the Sea , till they clearly refolve thQ doubts which attend the feveral opinions of it. , That there is no fuch thing as matter in the world^ till they can fat/sfaBorily tell US how the parts of it are united ; nor • that there are any material beings , till they have refolved all the perplexing difficulties about the fcveral affetlions of them ; . and that themfelves have not fo much as a rational foulj till chap. 8. The Truth of Scripture-Hiflory ajjerted, 219 they are bound to fat is fie us of the manner of the union of the foiil and ifo^y together. And if they can expedite all thefe , and many more difficulties about the mod obviom things ( a- bout which it is another thing to frame handfome and con- fiftent hjfothefes^ than to give a certain account of them ) then . let them be let loofe to the matters of dMne revelation ; as to which yet ( if they could perform the other ) there were no reafon for fuch an undertaking ; for that were, Secondly^ To commensurate the VerfeBions of God with the 2. narroji^ capacity of the humane intellect ; which is contrary to the natural Idea of God ; and to the manner whereby we take up our conceptions of God ; for the Idea of God doth fuppoie incomprehenfibility to belong to his nature ; and the manner whereby we form our conceptions of God^ is, by taking away all the imperfeBions we find in our felves, from the conception we form of a being abfolutely perfeB^ and by adding infinity to all the perfetJions we find in our own natures. Now this method of proceeding doth neceflarily imply a vaft difiance and dijpropor- tion between a finite and infinite under fianding. And if the un- derfii;2^j j they who pretend to it, muft ^e- movfiratexhtk general maxims according to which they judge, to be collected from an univerfal undoubted hifiory of Tiature \ which lies yet too dark and cbjcHye for any to pretend to the full hjo7i^ledge of,and would be only a demonftrat'ton of the highefi: arrogance after fb many fuccejlels endeavours^ of the moft/e^r^"^- /«g- -wits in any /^c/f/^ of ferfons to ///wr^ it to themfelves, efpe- cially if fuch perfons are fb far from fe arching into the depths of nature, that they luffcr themfelves very fairly to be led by the mfe by the moit dogmatical of all Fhilofophers ; and that in fuch principles which the more inqutjitive world hath now found to be \ try Jhort, uncertain ^ud fallacious. And U^on fever e enquiry we fliall find the grand principles which have been taken by thefe adorers ofreafon^ for almoft thtfiandard of it, have been fome Theories which have been taken up merely from ohfervation of the cmrfe of nature by fuch perfons, who fcarce oTpned ajjy hand of providence in the world. Now it cannot otherwife be conceived but that thefe theories or principles formed from fuch a narrow injpetfion into the natures of things^ muft make ftrange work when we come to apfly thofe things to them^ which w^ere never looked at in the forming of them : Whence came thole t7Vo received principles , that nothing can he produced out of nothing ; that there is no pojfihle return from a privation to a habit , but from thofe Fhilofophers who believed there was no- thing but matter in the world ; or if they did ailert the exi fence of a God^ yet fuppoied him unconcerned in the Government of the world. Whence com^ our Maflers of reafon to tell us that the (old cannot fubffi after death ivithout the body ? from what ^ Fhilofophy was this derived ? certainly from that which was ve- ry loth to acknowledge the im?mrtaHty of the foul of man : And any one who Itr icily o^/tTz^^j the clofc coherence of the principles of the Feripatetick Fhilofophy will find very little reom left for an eternal being to inter pofe it felf in tlie world \ and therefore Ibme have flirewdly obferved that Anftotle fpeaks more favourably of the beinz of God in his Exotericks , than in his Ac rom at icks J which all that know the reafon of the • names J will guefs at the reafon of. I demand then, muft the received principles of Pi>/7r;/^pZ>/,and thofe fhort imperfecl The- Qriesy wJ)ich were formed more from traditmit\i2,w experience^ by. chap. 8, The Truth of Scripture- Hifiory ajferted, 2xr by the ancient Greeks^ be taken from the flandard of reafon or no? If they muft, we may Coon for/ake not only the fMi-- mer myflertes of the Trinity^ Divmty of Chyijl-^ Refurrctlion^ &C. but we fliall foon Hiake hands with Creation^ FrcuidcKce^ if not immortality of /?«/;, and the Eeif^i^ of Gcihim^lelf If thefe things be dtfowned as the fiandard ofreafef?, let us know what will be fubftitutedm the room of them; and what Laws om faith mull be tryed by. Are they only Mathematical de- monfiratkns^ or the undoubted common notions of humane na- ture^ which whofoever underftands ajjents to them ? let any of theforementioned myfieries be made appear to contradtci thefe, and we will readily yield up our felves captives to rca- fon : But in the mean time let no jejune unpro'ved Hyfothefes in Fhilofophy, be fet as Judges ovqv matters of faith, whole only warrant for that office muft be Stat fro rat tone 'voluntasi Let the principles vit proceed by, be fir ft manifefted to be col- lebled from a moft certain and univerjal infpeBion into the na- ture of all beings, let the manner of frocefs hQ Jhewed how they were coUechd (left they labour with the common fault of the Chjmifts, of eftablifliing hypoftatical principles from the experiments of fome particular bodies, which others do as evi- dently refute) and laftly^ let it be made appear that thefe prin^ c ivies, thus collt^cd, will ierve indifferently for all beings, f pi- ritual as well as material, infinite as well as /;?//^, and when this Task is exadly performed, we will maake room for Reafon to /f upon the Bench , and bring the Scripture as the Prifoner to" its 5^r. Fourthly, According to this principle, irhat certainty can we a a. have at all of any thing we are to believe ? who hath fixed the *^ bounds of that w^hich men cd\\ reafon ? how fliall we know that th/fs far it will come, and no further ? If no banks be raijed againft it to keep it in its due c^.z^t/^/, we may have c^///^ to jear it may in time overthrow not only the Trinity, Incama- tto7t, RefurrcBicn of the dead, but all Other articles of tht Creed too ? What prefcriptton can be pleaded by one fort of men for reafon more than fo'^ another ? One will not believe t\\\?, article of hh faith, becaufe againft his reafon -^ and why , not another reje(fl another article on the lame pretence ? for whatever the ground of unbelief be, if it be but baptized by the name of reafon fit muft by this principle pafs uncontrouled- ifi' ^^2. * Origines Sacrce : Book It if. a fullen Thilofofher (hall tell us, that the notion of an im- TK at ertalfuh fiance contradicfs his reafon as much as the Trinity doth theirs^ and that the Uni^erfe is nothing elfe but a Sjfiem of bodies^ by what Artifice will our Mafhr of re«/c;? ;)«r^^ away all that ^/^c^ choler^ that fb c/o^/Jj his ?»/;^ J, that he can- not fee the notion of a /pirir through it ? And fuch a one will make a hard J?;i/}, but he will reconcile his opinion with iVri- p?«re too j and therefore why ihould he be bound up to mens exfltcations of Scripture^ when there is no necefiitjy that he can lee, of underfiandmg it in any other way than his own ? If another fliould come and tell us, that we muft be all Anthro- po?norpbites, and that otherwife the Scripture were not intel- ligible ; (hall not this man put in for reafon too ? Nay, lafi- ly^ if another (hall come and fpeak out, and tell us P of our under ft andingi fin which cafe Gc^/himfclf fometimes ^/?/>e^Vj /d? reafon) but it is quite another c^/e?, when wcfearch into the incomprehtnjible rsature of Gcd^ and pronounce with confidence that fuch r/}/??^/ cannot be in G(?^, becaufe we cannot fo;;/- frehend them ; which gives a fufficient anfwer to this o^jV- Uion. The fubftance then of this difcourfe is, that whatever DoBrine is fufRciently manifefted to be of divine revelation^ is to be embraced and believed as undoubtedly true, though our re^ro» cannot reach to the full ^;>/>re^£"?:?/?^« of all the Modes and Circumftances of it. So that as to thefe fublime my fteries our /^///j (lands upon this tv^o^oldi bottom. Firft, That the beings undcrft'andmg, and power of God doth infinite- ly tranfcend eurs^ and therefore he may reveal to m matters above our reach and capacity. Secondly, That whatever God doth reveal is undoubtedly truey though we may not fully un- der ft and it \ for this is a moft undoubted principle, that God cannot and will not deceive any in thofe things which he r^-. veals to men. Thus our firft fuppofition is cleared, that it is not repugnant to reafon^ that a doBrine may be true^ which de^ pends not on the evidence of the thing it jelf T\lQ jecond'lSy That in matters whofie truth depends not on %■'■ the evidence of the things themfelves, infallible teftimony is the fulleft demonftration of them. For thefe things, not being of , Mathematical evidence^ there muft be fome Other v^ay found out for dcmonft rating the truth of them. And in all thofe things whoje truth depends on Teftimony J the more creditable tliQ Teftimony is, the higher evidence is given to them ; but . that Teftimony which may deceive ^ cannot give fo pregnant zn.evidsnce as that Vv'hich cannot; for then all. imaginable . ■ objecfions.. 2,14 Origines Sacra : Book II. chjecrions are taken off. This is fo clear, that it needs no fur- ther froofy and therefore the third follows. - That there are certaJT^ vjays whereby' to know that a Tefli- mcny deli'vered IS infallible ; and that is fully proved by thefe t^'o Arguments, 'i . That it is the duty of all thfe to whom it is ^ro founded to believe it ; now how could that be a 'luty in them to belte've^ which they had no vjays to know whether it were a Teflimcny to ht belie'ved^ or no? 2. Becaufe God will condefrjn the world for unbelief: In which the Juftice of God's proceedings doth necelfarily fuppofe that there were Juf- pcient arguments to induce them to bclie've^ which could not be, unleife there were fome certain way fuppofed whereby a Tefiimony may be known to be infallible. Thefe three things now being fuppofed, viz. that a Dc^rine may be true which depends not en evidence of reafon ; that the greatefi demonfira- tion of the truth of fuch a Do^riney is its being delivered by infallible Tefiimony ; and that then are certain 7V ays whereby a Tefiimor>y may be known to be infallible^ Our firft principle is fully confirmed, which was, that where the truth of a Do- Brine depends not en evidence of reafcny but on the authority of him that reveals it, the only way to frove the Dc^rine to be true, is to prove the Tefiimony of htm that reveals it to he infallible. ' SeB. 8. The next principle or Hypothefis which I lay down, is. Hyp, 2. That there can be no greater evidence that a Tefiimony is infaU lible^ than that it is the Tefiimony of God himfelf The truth of this depends upon a common notion of humane nature^ which is the veracity of God in whatever way he difcovers himfelf to men ; and therefore the ultimate refolution of our faithy as to its formal objeBy muft be alone into the veracity of God revealing things UntO US ; for the pnncipium certitu^ dinis^ or found alien of all certain alTent can be fetched no higher^ neither will it ftand any lower than the infallible verity of God himfelf j and the p> inciptum patefaBiomSy OVthQ ground of discovery of fpiritual truth to OUr minds muft be refolved into Divine TefHrntry, or Revelation. Thefe two then not Taken a [under y but joyntly, Gcd^ who cannot lye, hath revea- led thefe things, is ih'* only certain foundation for a divine faith to reft it felf upon But now the particular excrcifc i>f a Divine faith lies in a firm ajjent to fuch a particular thing chap. 8. The Truth of Scripture-Hiflory ajferted, zz^ thing as Divinely revealed^ and herein lies not fb much the Tefiimony^ as the peculiar energy of the Spirit of God in incli- ning the Ibulto Relieve peculiar oHeHs of faith, as of Divme revelation. But the general ground of /^/ri>, which they call th.^ formal ohjeci, or the ratio proper mam credtmus is the ge- neral infallibility of a Divine Teftimony, For in a matter concferning divine revelation, there are two great o^ueftions Xo- hQ refolved ', The firft is, Pf^hy I believe a Divme Tefiimony'^ with zfirm ajfent I The anfwer to that is, Becaufe lam af- fured, that vj hat ever God fpeaks is true : the other is, upon Tvhat grounds do I believe this to be a Divine Teftimony ? the relblution of which, as far as I can under fl and, muft ht fetched from thofe rational evidences whereby a DivineTeftimony muft be diftinguijhed from ene merely humane and fallible. For the Spirit of God in its workings upon the mind, doth not carry it on by a brutijl) impulfe, but draws it by ^fpiritual difcovery of fuch /ro;7g- and perfivafive grounds to aflent to what is nvealed, that the mind doth readily give d. firm afj'ent to ?^^i which it lees fuch convincing reafon to believe. Now the ftrongefi; reafon to believe, is the manifefiation of a divine l^jhr/iQ-ny ; which the 5pir?f of Go^ fo clearly difcovers to a true believer, that he not only /r»?/y ^^wrj to the general foundation of /^if/t>, the veracity of Go^, but to the particular objeB propounded, as a matter of Divine Revelation. But this latter ejuefiton is not here the raatter of our difcourfe ; our propofition only concerns the general foundation oifaith^ which appears to be fb rational and evident, as no principle in nature can be wor^. For if the Teftimony on which I am to rely be or\\y God's, and I be alTured from natural reafon, that his Teftimony can be no other than infaUihU wherein doth the certainty of the foundation of faith fall Ihort of that in any ^ Mathematical demonft ration \ Upon which account a Divine Teftimony haih been r^-^^rJ^iwith fom ich -uenerAtion among all who have owned a Deity, although they nave been unac- quainted with any certain way of Divme revciation. And the reafon why any re\-^cied fuch a Teftir/iom among the Hea- thens, was either, becaufe thcry bdievtd not a Duty, or clfe that the particular Ttftimjues produced were riiere frauds and impoftures, and therefore no Div.ne Teftimony as it was given out to be. But the principle filil remained mdij put able, G g that 2.1 6 Origines Sacra : Book II. that on fuffofition the Tefitmony were what it pretended to be, there was the greateft reafon to belicvs it although it came not in fuch a way of frobation, as their fciences proceeded in From which princifle aroie that fpeech of Tulh which In fragment, he hath tranfl^ ted out of Plato s Timam^ Ac difficlUimum fa- d'cer. &:h a Diis ortis fiJ,^ations m the Tvorldj and infianceth particularly in the AJJyrians^ "^gyf- tia7fSy CilicianSjPiJtdians^VamphylianSy Grecians ^Remans^ Etru- rians ^ and others. It is true indeed he after mentions Ibme Vhi- lofophers who denyed it-, but they were moft part the followers of Epicurus y who denyed any providence^ and therefore might well take away divination ; but if Xenophanes Colophomus had zny followers who aflerted the one, and denyed the other (as 7iy//j' ieems to intimate that he was alone in that perpwafton) yet we may probably fuppofe the reajon of their rejeBing it might be the impoftures which went under the name of Di- vination among them ; which are excellently difcovered by that Trince of Roman Thilofophers as well as Orators^ in his fecond book of Divination ; but it is apparent by the iame Au* . thor, that the generality of Vhdofopbers confented with the people in this perfwajlon, as thQ followers of thofe three great SeSls of Socrates, Fjtbagoras, and Arifiotle were all appro^ vers of it ; but of all perjons the Stoicks were the moil z^ea- lous contenders for it, efpecially Chrjftppus, Diogenes Babylc- niusy Antipater and Voffidcnius • fome indeed rejeBed Ibme ways of Divination, yet embraced others, as Dicaarchus and CratippHs, who rejedted all but drear^s and ecfiafies ; but in the general we find thefetwo principles went together among them, the exiftenee of a Deity. dXi^th'i cert at?ity oi Dioination ; lb that from Divination they proved a Detty^ and from a Deity Divi- nation. Sifunt genera divwandi vera, ejje D^ios ; victjfimcfue fi Ditjint^ eJJe qui divinent, as ^intus Cicero there Ipeaks : and at laft thus triumphs in the multitude of his witnejjes, An dmn bejtia loquantur expeSlamusfiominum confentitnte autiori- tate contevti ncn fimus ? It may not be amifs to produce the chief argument on which the Stoicks infiftedto prove the m- cejfity oi Divination ^^'d^'^^rngxht exiftenee of a Deity. If there G g i he zi2 Origines Sacroi : Book II. he Gods , lay thQy,a?jJ tbey do not re^ueal to men things to cowf, it either is becauje they do not lo-ve them, or becaufe they do not know themjelves what fiall come to p^fs, or they thmk it is of no concernment to men to know future things ^or that it doth not become their Majefiy to re^ueal them, or that they cannot re- 'veal them to men if they would ; hut neither is it true that they do not love men \ for- the Gods are of a bountiful nature and friends to mankind, neither can they be ignorant of future things, becaufe they are appointed and decreed by them, neither is i*: of no concernment to men to know future things ; for that makes them more cautious if they know them ; neither is it re^ fugnant to thtir Majefiy to rei;eal the?n, for nothing is more noble than bounty and doing good ; and they muf needs kno'w thefe things ; therefore they may make them kno7vn to others ',and if they do make them known, there mufi be fome way whereby to kno7V that they do Jo ; or elfe they fignifie them to no furfofe. If now inftead of the knowledge of future contingencies, and the multitude of their Go Jj, they had mfified on the difco'very and revelation by the true God of thole ways,\si\iK\\ may lead men to eternal happiness, that argument had been ftrcng and convincing, which 'd% \t> ^?iV\^S\% SophtfticalzndifallactcTfs. So that It ]s> y^vy plain, that not only d.pojfibility oi Divination was acknowledged by thofe who wanted Divine revelation, but that th\S divination did not anfe from mere natural caufes^ but from an afflatus Divinus, and a cone it at io cjUt^dam animi, as they there f^eak, which imports nothing fnort of Divine infpiration. Nay the opinion of this was ^o common among them, that they thought any extraordinary perfons liad ibme- y r ,r , thine of Divine Enthufiafm in them, as TuUy elfewhere tells Deortm. ^^» JSemo vir magnus Jtne aliquo ajjiatu uivmo unojuamjuit. Although then thefe Heathens were greatly miflaken as to thole things they took for a Divine afflatus and Divination, yet we cannot conceive fo general a fence fliould be imprinted on the mmds of men of fuch a thing as that was, were it not a thing highly tonfonant to principles ofreaion,thRt God lliould communicate his mmd to the world by the inCpiration of fome prions. And therefore I conceive that Cicero and his brother ^intus, who mayiage that excellent difpute of Divination be- tween them, have divided the truth between them too. For on the one fide ^intus evidently proves the pojjlhihty of the thins; Chap. 8. The Truth of Scripture-Hijlory affertecL zz^ things the confecfuence of it upon the ackvoivUd^mcnt of a Deity ^ and t\\^ general cnnfent of mankind in the owning of it ; and on the other (ide tuUy himfelf excellently lays open the canity ^ folly ^ and uncertainty^ not only of the common -ways of Divination^ but of the oracles which were in luch great efieem among the Heathens, And although Tully doth ki pjarply and (arcafiicallj anfwer the argument from the commcn ■ conlent of men^ quaji 'vero quidtjiiam ft tarn valde^ quam ni- hil faf ere, 'vulgar e ; as though nothing men did more generally agreeing than in being fools \ yet -as it is evident that the ground of that [cojf w^as from the fcveral manners of Divi- nation then in ufe^ fo it cannot be thought to be a general im- feachment of humane nature in a /^iw^ (b confequent upon the Z'^/w^ of a God^ which as himfelf elfewhere proves, is as clear from reafcn as from that Teflimonmm gentium m hac una re non dijjidentium^ as the Chriftian "^^icero^ Laciantius fpeaks, the jy ,- .^ confent of Nations^ which fcarce agree m any thing elfe^ hut cap. 2.' that there is a God. That which we now inferr from hence is, ThatGc^ may make knojvn his mmd in a v^'^y in fal lib I eythough not immediate ; for in cafe of Infpiration of mere men^ it is not they fo much which fpeak, as God by them -, and in cafe that God himfelf fliould J^eak through the veil of humane nature^ the Tefimcny muft needs be infallible^ though the a^^ fearance of the Divinity be not vifble. Thofe evidences whereby a Divine Teflimony may he knowVy „ ^ niufi be fuch as may not leave mens minds infufpenfe, but are t, of their own nature convincing proofs of it. For although as to •^-^* ^ the event fome m.ay doubt ^ and others disbelieve the Teftimony ib proved^ yet it is fujjicient for OUV pur pofe^ that in the na- ture of the things (fuppofing them to lie luch as we fpeak of) they are fufficient for the eviction that the tefiimony attefted by them is divine and infallible. I know it is a great difptte among many, whether thofe things which are ufually called the common motives of faith^ do of their own nature only induce Z probable ferfwaftun of th^ truth of the do^rine d^ probable which they are jopied with, or elfe zrtxhty fufficitnt for the producing a firm ajfent to the dotlr^ne as True^, I' grant they are not demojiftrative fo as to inforce ajfent ; for we fee the contrary by the experience of all ages \ but that they ai-e not fufficient foundation for dXi unprejudiced mind to efiablijh afirniL 2^0 Origines Sacr^e : Book II. a firm ajTevt upov,\s a thing not e^fJe to be granted; chiefly upon this account, that an obligation to klk've doth lie upon every one to whom thefe e^vidences of a Divine Teflimony are /^z/- ficiemly difcovered And otherwife of all ftns the fin of z^?;- hdief as to Go J revealing bis mind, were the mod excufable and pardonable fin ; nay, it would be little lefs than a jp^r/ of prudence ; becaufe what can it be accctmted but temerity and imprudence in any to believe a do ^r ins as fr«e only upon pr(?^^- ^/g inducements ? and what can it be but wifdom to with-hold affent upon a mere verifimilnude ? confidering what the Zj- r/(7>^ F^^r hath long fince truly told us, Pindar.Od. r. ^ -^^^^t/ ^^ /S^;'^' ^f if* That a falfoood may frecjuently feem truer to common un- derfiandings than truth its jelf : and as Menander fpeaks , that a mere 'verftmilitude may have moi e force on vulgar minds than truth hath. If therefore there be no evidences given fufjjctent to carry the minds of men beyond mere probability, what/w can it be in thofe to di believe who cannot be obliged to believe as true what is only difcovered as probable : I can- not therefore fee how an cblization to believe a Divine Te- fiimony is confiftent with their opinion^ who make the utmofi which any outward evidences can extend to, to be only the bare credibility of the doBrme attefted by tiiem. I can very well (atisjie my felf with the ground andreafon w^hy the more - fubtle wits of the Church 0^ Rome do ajjert this ; for if nothing f//^ can be produced h^ all motives of faith hut only aprc- bable perjwafon of thQ truth of Chriffian doBrme, then here comes in the /^ir^// pretence for the Infallibility of their Chunh ; for otherwife they tell us we can have no foundation for ^Divine faith ; for how can that h^d. foundation for Divine faith ;,\\\k\\ can reach no higher than a moral inducement, and beget only a probable perfivafion of the credibility of the doBrine of C/jr/// ? But on what account thofe who difown the Infallibility of the Church of iiowe in the propofal of matters of /v/irZ?, (liould yet confent with thofe of it in an hypothefis taken up in /7rr>- labil/ty, merely out of fubferviency to that molt advantageous piece Chap. 8 . the truth of Scripture- Hiflory ajferted. 251 piece of the myflery of iniquity^ is not eafie to refolve. Unlefs the over-fondnefs of fome upon the do Brine of the Schools , more than of the Gofpel, hath been the occdfwn of it. For how agreeable can that opinion be to the Gofpd which fo evi- dently puts the mofl: defenfive weapons into the hands of unbe- liefs. For doubtlefs in the judgment of d.ny rational per [on ^ a mere probable perfwafion of the credibility of the docfrine of Chrifi^ where an ajfent to it as true is required^ can never be looked on as an ati of faith ; for if my a^ent to the truth of the ^Z;/;?^ be according to the /rf?;^//? orthe^rg-//2 m^d dotfrine, as a r/'/>^ which though not evidenced to be true by what he did, yet it was very pioujly credible ; but they rauft have a care withal of venturing their belief too far, only on fuch moral inducements as miracles were , for fear they Ihould go further than the /^rc^ of the arguments would carry them. Had not this opinion now, think we, been a very pro- bable way to have converted the Tr^^r/i upon the Vre aching of C/;n)? and his Jpofiles -, wh^nChrifi faith, though ye believe i^j^^ j^ .^^ «of w^, believe the works, that ye may know aud believe that the Father is in me, and I in him I Nay, laith this opinion, that is more than we are bound to do, though we fee thy works we are not bound to believe thy Teftimony to htDivine and certainly true ; but w^'e will do all we are bound to do ; we will entertain ^ favourable opinion of ^y perfon zud doctrine, and wait for fomewhat elfe, but we do not well kndw what, to perfwade us to believe. When the Apofiles Preach tht danger of unbeliefs becaufe the do chine of the Gofpel wa6 confirmed by fjgns and ^ •2- 3? ^ wonders, and divers miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghofi-, what a fair anfwer doth this opinion put into the mouths of Infidels, that notwithftandingall thefe ^^^^y and wonders, they were ne- ver bound to believe the Gofpel as a certain Tn//-/;, and there- fore they hope the danger is not fb great in neglecting the ^/i/- t/^f/c^^ promifed by the G^^^f/. I can- 232 Origittes Sacra : Book IL SeC\ I r. I cannot conceive that men otherwife learfied and fiber, fliould with fo much confidence afTert that the rational evidences of a Divine Teftimony are infujjicient to prove a dod:rine true, unlefs it be from hence^ that they find that notvvithftanding the ftrongeft evidences many perfons continue in unbelief. For fav they, if thefe arguments were fcientifical and demonfirativv, fas they rpeak) of the truth of the doctrine attefied by them, then all perfons to whom they are propounded^ muft certainly believe. But this is very eafily anfwered ; for we fpeak not of internal, but outward evidence ; not of that in the fubjeSl, but of the ob- jeB, or more fully of the reafon of the thing, and notthQ event in m ; for doubtlefs there may be undoubted truth and evi^ dence in many things which ComQ perfons either cannot or ivill ?2ot underftand. If Epicurus (hould contend ftill that the Sun and /^rj are no bigger than they feem to be, will It hence foL low that there can be no rati^s^l demonfiration of the contrary ? Nay, if the way of demonfi:ration be qjf^rfi him, and Telefco- pes put into his /;/j«ij, yet if he be refolved to maintain his (;r(?i/>, and therefore his opinion, and will not ufe the Telefco- pes, or /^^^^ ftill they are intended only to deceive his y/^/;/", what poffible tt^j will there be of convincing fuch a perfon, though the thing be in its Cdf 'demonfirable s' Now if the (ircngth of prejudice or maintaining of rrfi//- can prevail (b much in matters o^ Mathematical evidence, to with-hold ajfent, what /7(;rpfr may wx think a corrupt intereft may have upon the underftanding, as to the arguments which tend to prove the /r//f/; of that dotirine, which is fo repugnant to that cjr«^/ /«- r^Tf/ which the heart is already devoted to ! Our Blejfed Sa- viour hath himfelf given us fo full an account oi the original and caufQS of unbelief in the perfons heconverfed with, that that mny yield us a fufficient anfwer to this obje^ion. He tells us the 'ground of it was not want of light, nay, there was //g-/^/- fufficient to convince any, but that thoie to whom the T h 10 ^^^^^ came loved darknefs rather than it, becaufe their deeds were evil. That they could not believe while they received ho- Toh. 5. 44. ^^^^ ^^^ rf another, and fought not the honour which wobof God only, i. e. That they were ib greedy of applaufe from each nthtr, that they would not impartially fearch into the truth of that dotirine, which did touch X\idT fores fo to the quick, that they had rather have them fefier^ upon them, than chap. 8. The Truth of Scripture-Htflory ajferted. xj_j than go to the trouhle of lb jharf a cure. That the reafon fo few followed him was becaufe the Ti^ay was narrow and the Mat. 7. 14. gate fl-rait which men mufi' go in at ; and therefore no won- der fb few of the rich and fraud Pharifees could get in at it ; they were partly (b fwell'd with a high opinion of themfel'ues , and partly fo loaden with their riches , that they thought it was to no furfofe for them to think oi going in at IR) ftrait a gate, while they were refolved to p^rf with neither. That the final ground of the rejechon oi any, was not ti^^wr of evidence to bring them to believe, nor rt?^;?? of readineis in Chrift to receive them if they did, but it was a peevtjhj wiU Joh. $. 49, full, ohflinate, maliciom j^int that they would not come to Chrifi^ nor believe his Do^rine (for thole import the fame) but when the mod convincing miracles were uled, they would ra- Match, ri. 24. t\i^\: atiribute them to the Prince of Devils, rhan to the power of God, And though our Saviour prelently by rational and demonfirative arguments did prove the f^?;/r^ry to Xhtiv faces ^ yet we fee thereby it was a rgjolution not to be convinced ^ or yield to the Truth, which was the caule why they did not be- lieve. Now from this very inflance of our Saviour's proceed- ings with the Pharifees by rational arguments J demand,whether thefe arguments of our Saviour were {\}i^QKr\t foundations for a divine afjent to that truth that our Saviour did not his miracles hy any Diabolical but by Divine power or no I If they were , then it is evident that rational evidence may be a foundation for Divine faith , or that Ibme motives to believe may be ib fvrong^ as to be fufficient evidence of the /? uth and certain- ty of the DoBrine : If thele arguments were not fufficient proofs of what our Saviour fpake, then welfare the Pharifees \ it feems they faid nothing but what might be thus far judi^ fed, that the contrary to it could not be demonlhatcd. And if the evidence 0^ ovlV Saviour s mii'ades were ^o great ^ as , ibme fuppofe , that the Pharifees could not but be convinced that they were divine \ but out of their malice and envy they uttered this blaffhemy againft the Eoly Ghofl , to keep the people from following C/jri/? ; then we Hence inftrrtwo things: Firfi , How ftrong an evidence there was in the miracles of Chrifi, when it convinced his moft refolute enemies that they -were divine. Secondly , What pcwtr a corrupt will may have over a convinced underftandmg : For although the will may H h not 2^34 Origines Sacra : Book II. not hinder convlBion^ yet it may foon fiifle it, by fuggefti ng thofe things to th^mmd which may divert it from thofe cowx;/- BtGns of Truth 5 and feek to find out any ways to difgrace it*:.. It would be no difficult task to d if co'ver in all thofe inji-a7ice^. wherein the unbelief of men is difccvered in the A^e^y 7*^/^- »?f«/, that the perfins guilty of it did not proceed like ratioj^al men^ or fuch as defired Truth, but were wholly carried away through paffion, interefl, prejudice, difaffcBion^ or fbme other catf'e of that nature , which may give us a fufficient account why thofe perfons did not belie've , although there mi^ht be t/e^r and undoubted e'vidence to perfuade them to it. But al- though I alTert that thefe rational evidences are fufficient ar- guments of the truth of the dvBrine they come to manifefl , yet 1 would not be fo tmderfiood , that 1 thereby refil-ve all Religion into a mere aft ofreafon and knowledge^ and that no more p^ot^^r is required in the underfiandmg to believe the Go- j^f/, than to believe a Mathematical demon fi ration : which is . another objetlion forae lay in Xh^way of this opinion ; butitisv not difficult getting over it. For the fufficiency which I attri- bute to rational evidence^ is not abfolute and fimplcy but in fua genere, as an objeBive evidence, Notwithftanding.this, the whole 5i^<3r/^ of the 6'/)ir/^ of God in its peculiar energy and way of operation Upon the foul, is left e«/ire to it felf : But ■ then when the Jpirit works as to the planting of a truly divine faith, I do not think that it only perfuades the foul of the 7niri? of a Divine Tefiimony, but withall reprefents the Truths revealed by that Teftirnony, with all that excellency and /«/>^- /?/ewe/j that there is in them, that by the moft agreeable, yet effeSlual influence of the fpirit Upon the foul, it cheerfully em- braceth that 7>«/^ which is revealed, and cordially yields up its . ielf in obedience to it. This is the Divine faith which the Scri- ture acquaints us with , and not fuch a one as merely believes the truth of a Divine Te/limony -, and as to the produ^ion ofthis/^/r/6, 1 acknowledge mere rational evidence tohQinfuf- ficient, becaufe they proceed in two very different ivays-, the one is to fatisfie mens minds in the truth of the doBrtne, the other is to bring them effeSiually to adhere unto it. The afferting of, the one therefore doth no more tend to de/lrcy the other, than the faying that ^Telejcope will help us to difcover very much of the heavenly bodies ^ doth imply that a blind man may fee • Chap. 9. The Truth of Scripture-Hiflory afferted. "^3 j tlem^ if he makes but ufe of them. Although therefore the natural man cannot favin^lj apprehend the things of God, yet there may be fo much rational evidence going along with Di- mne revelation^ that fuppofing reason to be pure^ and not cor- rupted and jleeped in fence as now it is , it would difcover Cpi- ritual evidence to be the moft real and convincing evidence. Thus far we have proved, That where there is any infaUihle Te- mcny , there ts fufficient rational evidence going along with it , to make it appear that it is from God. CHAP. IX. The rational evidence of the Truth- of Chriftian Religi- on from Miracles. « T^e fojphilgy of ftiiracles appears from God and providence^ the evidence of a Divine Teftimony by them. God alone can real- ly alter the courfe of nature. The DeviPs power of working miracles confidered. 0/ Simon MagUS,Apollonius. The cures in the Temple o/^fculapius at Rome, d^r. God never works miracles^ hut for fome particular end. The particular reafhns of the miracles of Chrifi. The repealing the Law o/Mo- fes, which had been fetled by miracles. Why Chrifi checked the Pharifees for demanding a fign^ when him f elf appeals to his miracles. The power of Chrifi s miracles on many who did not throughly believe. Chrifi^ s miracles made it evident that he was the Meffias^ becgufe the predictions were fulfilled m him. IVhy ]ohn Baptift wrought no miracles, Chrifi' s mi- racles necejj'ary for the overthrow of the Devil's Kingdom, Of the Demoniacks and Lunaticks in the Go^d^ and tn the Primitive Church, The power of the name of Chri/l over them largely proved by Several Teffimanies, The evidence thence' of a Divine Power in Chrifi. Of counterfeit dij^ofief fions. Of miracles wrought among Infidels. Of the future flate of the Church. The neceffitj of the miracles of Chrifi , iis to the propagation ofChri/rian Religion : th^t proved from the condition of the publijhers^ and the fuccefs of the DoBrine. The A^oftles knew the hazard of their employment 5 before H h 2 they %^6 . Origines Sacra : Book IL ^^j they entred on it. The holdmfs and refolution of the Affiles notivithfiandmg this , compared with heathen Thilofop/^ers, JSfo motive could carry the A^oftles through their imfloyment^ hut the truth of their DoBrine\ n/)t jeeking the honour^ fro- fit or fleafure of the world. The Afofiles evidence of the truth of their DoBrine lay m being eye-ivitnejjes of our Savi- " curs miracles and refurreBion. That attefied by themfelves ; their fufficiency thence for preaching the GoJ^el. Of the na- ture of the doclnne of the GoJ^el ; contrariety of it to natural inclinations, -Strange fuccejs of it, not7i^ithfianding it came not with humane power : No Chrifiian Emperour , till the Gofpel univerjally preached. The weaknefs and fimplicity of • the inftruments which "preached the Gofpel. From all which the great evidence of the power of miracles is proved, SeB, I. C'^^ ^^ rational evidences which tend to confirm the truth of Hyp, C. V V ^ divine Teflimony^ there can be none greater than apoW' er of working miracles for confirmation that the Tefiimony whitch is revealed is infallible. The pojfibility of a power of miracles cannot be ejuefi;toned by any who aflfert a Deity and a Vrovi- dence ; for by the fame power that things were either at firft produced, or are ftill confer ved ( which is equivalent to the o« ther ) the courfe of nature may be altered , and things caw fed which are beyond the ^ower of inferiour caufes : For though that be an immutable Law of Nature as to Thjfical beings^ that every thing remains in the courfe and order wherein it was fet at the Creation^ yet that only holds till the fame poiver which • fet it in that order fliall otherwile dtjpofe of it \ granting then the pojfibiltty of miracles, the fubje(fl of this Hyfothefis is, That a power of miracles is the cleareft evidence of a divine Tefii- mony, which will appear from theie following confiderations. I . God alone can really alter the courfe of nature, I fpeak not of fuch things which arc apt only to raife admiration m us be- caufe of our unacquaintedne{s with the caufes of them, or man- ner of their produBion, which are thence called wonders, much lels of mere juggles and impoftures , whereby the eyes of men are deceived ; but I fpeak of fuch things as are in themfelves cither contrary to, or above the courfe of nature, i. e. that or- der which is eflablijhed in the univerfe. The Devil no que- fiion may, and doth often deceive the world, and may by the • ftihilty chap. 9. The Truth of Scrtpture-Hljlory ajferted, "i^j fubtilty and agility of his nature , perform fach things as may amule the minds of men^ and fometimes put theyn to it, to find • a difference between them and real miracles, if they only make thdvfenfes judges of them. And liich kind of wonders^ though they are but fparingly done, and with a kind of fecrecy ( as though they were confulting with Cataline about the hurning Rome yet the Devil would hzvQ fome (efpecially when Igno- rance and Superftition are Jfcendants) to keep up his inter efi in the world. Or elfe, when he is like to be difpoffeffed and thrown out of all , he then tries his utmoft to keep as m.any to him as may be •, thus when the Spirit of God appeared irr the miracles of our Saviour and his Jpofiles and the Trimi- tive Church , he then conjured up all the infernal Towers ta do Ibmething parallel^ to keep polleffion of his Idolatrom Tem- ples \ as long as he could. Thus we find Simon Magm dog^ ging the Apofiles ( as it w^ere ) at the heels ^ that by his Ma- gick he might fiagger the faith of people concerning the mira- cles wrought by the Apoftles : after him Apollonim appeared upon the Stage ; but his wonders are fuch pitifull things , compared with thofe wrought by Chrift or his Apofiles^ that it could be nothing but malice in Hierocles to mention him iir competition with Chrifi. But thole things which feem a great deal more confiderable than either of thefe^ were, The cure of a blind man by Vefpafian in ^Aigypt^ mentioned by Tacitus and Sueton. Fefp Suetonim^ wherein there was a palpable imitation of our Sa- ^^^' 7- vioufs curing the blind man in the Gofpel ; for the man told Vefpafian , reftiturum oculos ft infpuiffet , that he fhould receive- his fight by his fpittle ; So Spartianm tells us of a woman that' was cured of her blindnefs by kiffing the knees of the Emperour Adrian; and Boxhornim hath produced an old Table in the Temple of a^fculapim at Rome of feveral difeafed perfons that were cured there : A blind man in the time of Antoninus was cured by this Oracle ; he mufi come to the Altar^ and kneel there 5 from the right fide he muft turn to the left , and put five fin- gers upon the Aliar^ and then lift up his hands and touch his eyes^ and fo was cured : Another called Lucius cured of the pain of his fide ^ by mixing the afioes of the Altar with tJie wine^ and ap^ plying it to his fide ; another cured of fpitting ofbloud by the ker- nel of a pine-apple^ and honey ufed three days j a fourth cured ofnuefi: Bj3m^. blindnefs by the bloud of a white Cock md honey ufed three days q. 7. npptk %\3 Orighes S acres : Book H. r4pon his eyes. Thefe are the moft confidershk of all the pre- . tended miracles done about that time ^ when Xhtnoife of the thrifiian miracles were fpread Co far and done fb frequently , that they challenged the Heathens again and again to bring forth Ruy perfon pojfejfed with a jDm/, if he did not confefs to them that he was a Z)m/, though he made the Heathens be- lieve that he was a God, they were contented to leave thQir blood in thQ place, ^pol c. 23. For thus Tertu Hi an fpeaks in his Jpology to them : Edatur hie aliquis fub tribunalibm vefirisj quern d^mone agi confiet : juf- fus a quolibet Chriftiano Icqui fpirirus ille^ tam fe Damonem con- fitehitiir de vtro^ quam alibi Deum de falfo : aque producatur aliquis ex iis qui de Deo pati exiftimantur , qui arts inhalantes mimen de nidore concipiunt, qui ruBando curantur, qui anhelan- do profantur. Ifia ipfa Virgo cos left;} pluviarum pollicitatrix , ifte ipfe ly^fculapim Medicinarum demonftrator, alias de mortu- titris fcordii & denatii & Aflepiadoti fubminiftrator , nift fe Damones confejfi fuerint , Chriftiano mentiri non audentes , ibi- dem illius Chriftiani procaciftimi fanguinem fundite, Suid ifto opere manifeftius^ quid hac probatione fidelius ? fimpUcitas veri- tatis in medio eft \ ijirtm illi fua affftit , nihil fufpicari licebit , magia aut aliqua fallacia fieri, Di^is non ft et is, ft oculi veftri & aures permiferint vob^s. In thefe very daring words , we fee how the Chriftians appealed to thciv fenfes, even with the hazard of their own Hves^ that they would make even ^^fcu- lapiushimM^ confefs what he waSy and by whole power all the .cur€s were wrought upon the dreamers in his Temples, And for the manner of the Devils cures , the fame Author explains if y^o/. C.22. " thus, L^dunt primoy dehinc remediapracipiunt ad miraculum no- va^ five coyitraria^ poft' qua d^finunt ladere & curate creduntur. They firft pojfefs the bodies thcmfelves (as JDemoniacks were com- mon in thofe times) and ajfeci it with various diftempers, after- wards upon ufing the ft range remedies prefer ibed by C£fciilapius , they forfake their ftation, and the perfon is cured. And for the cures performed by the Emperours , thofe who confider what various artifices were about that time ufed to procure an opi- nion o^ Divinity in the Emperours^ will not much wonder that • fuch reports fiiould be fpread of them, or that any pcrfons fliould feign thefe diftempers to give thc/ufelves out to be cured by /te^ But granting foniewhat wonderful! in thefe ^ what are they, ^^ Ghap. 9 . fhe Truth of Scripture- Hiflory ajfertecL 139 they, compared with thole dom by Qhriftians ? and who ever would lay down his life to attefi any of them ? So that though the Devil by his fubriUy may eafily impfe upon SfeBators eyes , yet it was imfoffibk for him by any fower of his own to alter the courfe of nature , or produce any r^^/ miracle. For every true miracle is a prodnclion of fomsthmg out of nothing (which cannot be done by lefs than an omnipotent arm) and that either in the thing it felf^ or the manner of producing it. In the thing it [elf when it is of that nan^re that it cannot be froducedhv any fecond caufes, as the raijing of the ^e?^i; in the manner of J^/t^^ it, when though the thing lies within the /?o/^ fihtlit'y of fecond c^«/ej, yet it is performed without the -W/) of ^«t7 idithem^ as in the c«re ofdifeafes without any u[e of means ^ by a 7Vord Jpeaking^ the touch of a garment^ &C. Now that all thofe miracles which were wrought in confirmation of the Chrifiian do&:rine were fuch true and proper miracles , will be difcovered afterwards. God ne'ver alters the course of nature ^ hut for fome 'very SeB,2lr confiderahle end. For otherwife when he did it, it would not 2» be taken notice of, nor thought to be an alteration of the order of nature^ but only Ibme rare contingencies which lie hid in the order of caufes^ but only break out at fome times : of which ibrt ^ are all thole things which the ignorant world is apt to account as Prodigies, Of all which rare contingencies in nature^ 1 fay, as the Roman Orator doth, Si quod raro fit , id portentum put an- Cicero dt Din^-. dum efi ^ fiapientem eJJ'e portentum efi , fiapius enim mulum pe-^ I' ^' perijje arbitror^ (?^uam fiapientem fuifj'e. If all rare contingencies he accounted prodigies^ a Wifie man is certainly the great efi Pro- digy. But thefe are quite of another nature from true mira- clesy which are immediately produced by a di%}ine Powery and intended for a confi.rmatwn of fome divim Tefiimoyiy, There are now feveral weighty reajons which might make miracles necedary in the time of our Sa-piour, as an evidence oFhis Di- 'Vine Authority and Power. That he came to take down that vjay of worjliip vjhich had 5^ been to them, viz. his driving the buyers ]o\x. 1. i». and fellers cut of the Temfle : Which being a thing permitted by the Sanhedrm and the Priefis, how could they think (b mean a per fin, in appearance, as our Saviour was, could ever have effeBed it , had it not been for a Divine Majefiy and Pou'fr which appeared in him ? It was not then the expeBa- tion of miracles which our Saviour rebuked in the jews^ but being unfaiisfied with the kind and w^r«r^ of our Savi^ ours miracles. It was their hypocrifie and unbelief which Chrift condemned, notwithftanding the frequent miracles which he -wrought among them : For we plainly find our Sa- ^ viour very often appealing to his miracles as the evidences of-J^ 'j!' ' his Divine Commiffion : If I had not done the works among Iq]^^ ij.il© them, which no man elfe did, they had not had Jin, i. e. in not helievtng me. Whereby Chrifi both lets forth the necejfity of his working miracles in order to the conviSlion of the world, and the greatnefs of the miracles which he wrought -, he did thofe no man elfe had done, no not Mofes and £//^/, in cu- ring all manner of difeafes by the word of his mouth-, and thole miracles which they had done, he exceeded them in the manner oi doing them. A/fz/ej fed them with bread from Hi?^- ven,hut Chrifi multiplied on earth fomQfew loaves and fijhes^ to the feeding of many thoufands : Elias indeed raifed one from the dead ; but Chrifi railed 7;7or^, and one after ^^ had been four days in the^r^i;^. And upon this very evidence of our Saviour s miracles we find many believing on him. And even of thofe who were not fo far wrought upon as to become followers of Chrifi^ as the only Mej[/ias,yQt we find them lb far joj,^ j .« perfwaded by Xht power of his miracle s,thd.t they looked upon 2. n.' him as a great Prophet, or one that was j^w^ fromG^^i.- So Ni- cedemus, who came fir ft to C/ri/? more as a rational enquirer than a believer, yet we lee he \nzs perfwaded that he was a tea- cher come from God,becaufe no man could do the miracles which^ ' ^' Chrifi did, unlefs God were with him. And before him many of thtjews at Jerufalem believed in his name when they fav/ the miracles which he did ; yet thele perlbns Chrifi would 7tot trufi himfelf with,hecaufe he knew their hearts were not fubdued^ ^' *^' to his dochine^ though their underfiandings were convinced by I i his 142 . . Origines Sacra^ : Book IT his miracles, ilnd after this others of the Je-ws that looked not on him as thQ Me/fiafj yet it is faid they belie'ved en him on the account of his miracles. And many of the people Re- lieved en him^ and Jaid^ When Chrijk comet h, will he do more miracles than thefe v^hich this man hath done ? Although herein they were mofl unreafonahle in believing the evidence^ , ^ and not the truth attefted by it, in believing Chrifl to be ■^' '^' ^^' one fent from God by his miracles, and yet not believing him to be the Mejfiasy which was the thing attefied by them. Not that mere 7mracles would prove the fey fen to be the Mejfias who did them, but the miracles proved the teftimony to be Divine ; now that which Chrifi delivered to them as a Divine Tefiimonj^ was his being the Mejfias, and therefore by the lame reafon they believed him to be one fent from Qod^ they ought to have beUeved him to be the Mejfias \ for one fent from Gc J could nt^^v faljifie in the main of his mejj'age, as thiswasofour 5^^/5«r'j preaching. And hence it is obferv able our Saviour did not (hew forth his Divine power till he en- tred upon his office of preaching, thereby making it appear he intended this as the great evidence of the truth of XhQ doBrine which he preached to them, And herein the blind man in the Gofpel faw more truth and reafon than the whole Court of Sanhednn, before which in probability he was convented about his cure by Chrifi ; for when they fought to get fome- thing out of him in difparagement of our Saviours perf$n and miracle^ he (liarply and roundly tells them, when they faid they knew God fpake to Mcfes^ but for this fellow, we Joh. 9.19 f ^o. know not from whence he is. Why herein, faith he, is ver. 33. ^ marvellous thing, that ye know not fro?n whence he is, and yet he hath opened mine eyes. If this man were not of God^ he could do nothing ; (as though he had faid) is it not plain that this man is imployed by God in the world by the mi- racles which he doth ? for otherwife God would not fo rea- dily ajfift him in doing fuch great works ; for we know that Ver. 31. God heareth not jinners : but if any man be a vjorfiipper of God, and doth his will , him he heareth ; i. e if this man pre- tended a Commij/ion from Ht.^ven falfly (whereby he would be the greatefi of fmners) can we think God would {o mi- raculoufy affift him ? but w^e know by our La7iJ ., if one comes with a Commijjkn from God^ and draw men not to. Idolatry^ ^ chap. 9. The Truth of Scripture- Hiflory ajferted, 243 iMatry^ which is meant by a vjorjJjipper of God, fuch a one God is prefentwith, and we are bound to belienje him. And for this very miracle, or curing one born blind, was the like ever heard of before ? did ever Adofei or the Prophets do it ? Thus we fee what ftrong rational evidence there was in this miracle of Chrifl mt\\Q judgment of this blind man ^ which he uttered with fo much reafon before the Court of Sanhe- drin, when he knew how like he was to be excommunicated for it ; and yet this very per[cn was as yet ignorant that Chrijl was the trm Mejfias, as appears by the fequel of the Chapter j ^^^- '^^^ but upon Chnjl's re'velalion of himfelf to him, he prefently ^^^ g helie'ved en him. HoW ftrangely irrational were the "'jeivs then in rejecting our Saincur when his miracles not only exceeded thoib of Mofes both in mtmher^nd quality ; butwh'ch was more, they law themfel'ves the miracles which Chrifr did, but they received thofe of Mofes only upon i\\q credit of their Father i 1 And from ih^firength of the evidence arifing from the power of miracles it is that St. Pf^er tells the promijjcw ctts Afjemhly, Adi. 2. 12. That Jefm o/' Nazareth 22/^/ ^ Ma72 approved of God among them-, by miracles, wonders and Jigns^ which God did by him in the midft of them, as they themfelves alfo knew. He appeals to their own knowledge, which he would not certainly have done, had it not been in a ca(e beyond all difpMe among them. Which was a thing fo notorious among them, that we find the Fharifees themfelves confeffing it, fVhat do we ? For this man doth many miracles ; Joh. 11.47. Now then in a Nation whole religion had been efiablijhed by miracles^ and the certainty of the truth of it, among thofe who then profelTed it, did depend fo much upon the confiant credit which the report of the miracles done at the fetling of their Law had among them ; what could be a more ra- tional convincing way of proceedings than for our Saviour to manifeft- by a greater power of miracles in himfelf the undoubted credentials of his commiffion from Heaven^, and that he was the true Meffas, which was foretold by their own moll f acred and authenttcal records ? Which v^^ili appear more, j^ecaufe the power of miracles did evidently declare that he ^ ^ was the very perfon promifedi For if the exaft correfpon- ' ^' dency of the event to the prediBions in a Nation owning li 2 them 244 Origines Sacra : Book 11. them as Divine , be an undoubted evidence that they are ex- actly fulfilled^ our Saviour was moft certainly the perfon fo often fpoken of in the Old Teftament, For many of the ?ro- fbecies of the Old Tefiament concerning the Meffias , if they were not fulfilled in Chrtft , in the conditions the Je-ws have been in fince their dij^erfion^ ( which fell out exadtly accor- ding to the freditlion of Chrifi ) it is tmpojjihle they fliould be fulfilled at all So that either the predithons muft lofe their di- vine authority^ or they muft be accomplijJjed in our hlefied Sa- C3ttci<9os, f.i 3. viour. For as TertuUian (harply fays to the Jews^ Redde ft a- turn Judaa cjuem Chri/l-m inveniat, d^ alium contende venire ; Let the people of the Jews he in their former condition^ and then . f lead for a Meffias to come. For can any thing be more flam than that the Mefilas was to be born in Bethlehem of Jud^al but where is that now , and how long fince the Jews enjoyed any civil VoUty there ? what is become of the fecond Temple^ in the time of which the defire of all Nations JJjould come ? Is not Jerufahm zlvQ^dy deftroyed J and thz ohlation there long fince ceafed , which was to come to pafs fo fo6n after the MeJ- Jias^ and did accordingly ? Is not the Scepter yet departed from Judah , and the Lawgiver from between his feety and is not Shiloh yet come ? What ftrange unintelligible weeks were thole of Daniel, if they were extended to (b indefinite a fpace of time as the Jews pretend ? and if indefinite , what certain ground could from thence be gathered of any time wherein their accomplijliment was to be expetfed? but not to expatiate on thofc things which are already fo largely proved beyond all foffibility of contradtBion , by the ancient and modern learned PVriters againft the Jeji^s : To infift therefore on our prelent hufinefs ; are not the Prophecies concerning the miracles which , ifa. 3 J. 5,^. the Mejfias fhould work^ exadly fulfilled in Chrifi? Then the ' eyes of the blind fijall be opened , and the ears of the deaf Jliall he u^fiopped', thenfioall the lame man leap as an Hart, and the tongue of the dumb Jhall fing. He muft be a great fir anger in 11 ' the Hifiory of the New Teftament that is to (eek for an exadl y.Grot, in Joh. fulfilling of this Prophecy. Nay , and the Jewijh Midrafch , 5>' 3 2- Upon ffal. 146. 8. faith, that when Meffias comes, he flwuld open the eyes of the blind ; and the Jews themfelves often fptak of the great miracles which the Meffias ftiould doe when he appears ; and therefore out of their own mouths will they be Chap. 9. The Truth of Scripture- Hiflory afferted. 245- be conclernned , when the miracles of Chrift make it fb evident that he was the true MeJJias. Hence when John Baptifi fent his Difciples to Chrifi for them to be fully fatisfied concerning him, Chrift gives this anfwer to them ; he bids them tell him, the blind receive their fight ^ and the lame walk, and the Lepers Matth. 1 1. 5, are cleanfed^ and the deaf hear ^ and the dead are raifed up^^Q, gs though the meynioning of thefe miracles was fufficient to make it appear to them who he was whom they came to en- quire after. And therefore it is obfervable that John Baptifi himfelf, though ^re^^^r than the Frophets, my ^than whom there Mat. 11. 9,1 r, 7i^as not a greater born of women^ by our Saviour'^ own Tefli- mony ; yet of him it is faid, that he wrought no miracle : of Joh. 10. 41. which no account can be given fb probable and rational, as that God in his infnite wifdom was pleajed fo to order it, that the evidence of our Saviour's being the Meffias might be made more clear by the miracles which he wrought \ that the 7mnds of people might not be difiraHed between John and Chrift- ; he therefore referved the glory of miracles wholly to tht name of Chrift, that there might be no pretence of competition be- tween John and him. Another realbn of the neceiTity of miracles in our Saviour Selh 40. by way of rational evidence, is, the overthrowing the poiver ^, and kingdom of the Devil in the world. For which purpofe it is obfervable that the Devil had fcarce ever greater power over the bodies of men as well as their y^«//, than at that time-, thence we read of fuch a multitude of demoniacks in the Go- /pel.Vov it feems very harfhto interpret thofe merely ofEpilef- tical and Lunatick perfbns, both becaule the S'cti^vi{of^ciy and Matth. 4* 24* cn\v)viA^Q(y^Jot, and r^^KvltyA , are mentioned diftinBly, and that it appears by the primitive Church afterwards how fre- quent it was to ejed the Devil out of pojj'ejjed perfons. Nay, fo far am I from thinking that the Demoniacks were mere Luna- ticks, that I rather think with Vojfuts that the Lunaticks were De LkUt. 1 2. truly Demoniacks , only they were not conftantly under the c. 19. power of the Devil ^ but as their p^ro^;i/wj returned upon them, the Devil loving to fi\h in fuch troubled waters. And thence ^^^' '7* ^^' the fame perfbn is called a Lunatick in one place , who is cal- Luke 9. 39. led a Demoniack in another ; becaufe he did ruere in principiis | lunatienum , as the Arabick verfion expreffeth it ; or as Rufti- I ctis Elpdim more fully explains it,. Repferat ^4^ Origines Sacr^tj Book II. -^'^' ^ Refferat in medium rahki horenda furoris D^emonis afflatu^ frofria c^ai pfie nocivus Alli'lit capas fxdo difcYimms ^-ientes^ Menfirua dec'uluos cum Luna recolligit ignes, Tioeophyla^ is of opinion, that the Jews in the time of our Saviour fuppofed, that the fouls of dead men became Da- Matt. 8. 28, ^ons^ and thence we read in Scripture of the 'Deinomacks a- mong the Tomhs : but it is far more prohahle which Grotim conceives, that the Jeii-'j were of opinion, that the* /Wi of dead men did hover up and dooi^n about their bodies^ and that thele ivere fo long under the Devils p7i^er, which many of the Je7vs to this day believe and make ufe of the in fiance of the Vy.homfs railing Samuel ; on which account the Devils to favour an opinion fb advantageous to their interefi, might appear v/ith greater /enw mdfurj about their burying places^ as we fee they did in thofe pojjejjed ferfons. But on wiiat- ever acfount it was, we find it evident that about the time of our Saviour s appearance, and fome time after, the truly hii^y^^Qi were VQxy fret^mnt ; whether it were that the Devil by fuch frequent fojjejjlons of perfons, and making them to do fuch fi range things, might thereby endeavour to inva- lidate the evidence of our Savioufs miracles ( from whence it is probable the Fharijees raifed their calumny, that Chrift did miracles by Beelztbub, becaufe they faw fo many ftrange ap- pearances caufed by poJJ'eJJed perjons) or whether it were through the admirable providence of God, which might give Satan the greater liberty at that time,on purpofe to heighten the glory of our Saviour in difpojj effing of him, and thereby to give the highefi rational evidence, that his power was of God, which tended fo much to the defiruBion of the Kingdom of 5j^<«w. S^t7. 5. And hciKQ the Primitive Chrifiians did fo much triumph, and as it were infult over the Dei;// where-evcr they found liim, making him to remove his lodgings from pojfefedperfons, by a 92/r/f of ejeBion from the w^we of Chrift. Thence Ori~ gen rationally concludes that Chrifi had his power given him from above, becaufe at his very name the Devils forfook the 1 O/i^cCdfJ.-^. bodies which they had pojfejfed, ei y^^jiVi ^o^iv h av-wSMHotc chap. 9. The Truth of Scripture- Hijlory ajferted. 247 tw^-ilii AVi^i^y dm ^^ var' ctu^ 7s:ziKiiji\i;j^cov. And he elfevvhere tells us, that even the meaneft fort of Chrifiians without any Ceremony^ but merely by their prayers, did ordinarily ejed , ^ the Devil out of mens bodies : 2rum d^fiolum^ inviti, miferi corporibus mhorrefcunt y C^' vJ cxilmnt fiatim^ uel evanefcunt gradatim, pr out fides pa^ientii ^.djuvnt^ aut gratia curantis afpirat. Can we now ' think the Devil (hould not only forfake his Tyranny over the bodies of men, but let go fo advantageous a pillar of his tyranny over the confidences of men in Idolatrous worfhip, as the concealing himlelf was, had he not been forced to it by a power far greater than his own ? So Cyprian ad Der/ietria- num^ appeals to him being the Trcconful of Africa, about the fame thing (who had written fiiar ply againft the Chn(f':ans) . for fpeaking of the Devils whom they worjhipped in their Idols, O fi audjre eos velles d^ videre, quando a nobis adju- Ad Demur fantiiT dr torquentur Spiritualibus f-agrts d^ verborum tor- f. 12. mentis de obfiejfis corporibus ejiciuntur, quando ejulantes d^ gementes voce hum an a, d^ potefiate divina flageUa d^ verbera fientientesy venturum judicium confitentur \ veni d^ cognofce vera e[fe qua dioimus : and a little after, videbis fiub manu nofira xaS Origines Sacne : Book II. mjtra fiare vinBos, d^ tremere captivos, ejuos tu fufpicis d^ venerarts ut Dominos, Did ever any of the Heathen Magi- cians (of which there were good (tore) extort fuch things from the De^'ds, as the Chrifiians did,merely by th^'w prayers^ and invocations oithQ name of God and Chrifi ? did they ever make them confefs to be what they were, not only in pofTef- fed bodies but in their Temples too ? that was beyond th^-power of their Ephejtan letters^ or any of their Magical incantations. Did the Devtls ever dread fo much the name of Socrates or Ari(lides as they did that of God and of Chrifi ? Of which De juJiitia.Ub. LaBantius thus fpeaks, .^io audit o tremunt^ exclamant^ d^ ^.c 21. j^fi J} fverherarique tefiantur^ d^ interrogati ^»i fint^ quando venerinty quando in hcmlnem irrepferint, confitentur Jic extorti^ d^ excruciati virtute divini numtms exulant ; propter h^c -^^^^ Damon e(i quern colis ; cum Dei d^ Chrifii ejus relig. nomen audierit^ contremifcity d^ ut int err ogam ibus nobis refpon- deat trepidanti^ verba, vix fe cclligit \ adherens homini lace- ratur^ uritiir^ vapulat^ d^ ftatim de commijfis fceleribus confite- tur. By which Tcflimonies it appears what power over Satan, "when he was in his Kingdom, the Chrifiians by the power of Chrifi had ; not as though the bare name of Chri(t had fo L. I. c.Qilf. ^y^^f ^^ efficacy in the ejection of Devils, Z% Origen feems to htoi opinion (}n a difcourfe about the efficacy of »^wej, unwor- thy of (b great a Philofopher) but that God might manifeft to the world the truth that was contained in that name, he did give a power to fuch as made ufe of it, of working miracles by it. And thence we read in Scripture, that fome who were not throughly Chrifiians, but yet profeffed the truth of the Go/pel, and that what they did was for the honour of Chnfi, had a pc- M tt. 7- ft2. "^'^^ ^f^^fi^^S ^"^ Devils and doing many wond^^rful th'mgs through his m^me^ By Chap. 9. The Truth of Scripture-Hiflory ajfertedt, 249 By thefe and many other teftimonies which might be pro- SeB, 6. duced out of the Primitive Churchy we find an cxaO: accom- plijhment of our Saviours promife to his Difciples when he took his leave of them : And thefe figns jh all follow them that Mark 16. it. believe^ In my name jhall they cafl out Devils^ &c. This power then in the Primitive Church had a twofold argument m it, both as it was a manifestation of the truth of the prediBions of our Saviour^ and as it was an evidence of the Divine power of Chrifl^ when his name fo long after his afcenfion had {b great a command over all the infernal fpirits ; and that Co evidently y that at that time when the Chriftians did as it were Tyrannize over Satan fo in his own territories^ yet then the greatejl of his Magicians had no poB^er to hurt the bodies of the Chri- ftianSy which is a thing Or/^fZ2 takes much notice of. For when Celfis faith from Diogenes z^^gyptim that M'agick could (?;?/y ^//rf ignorant and wicked men, and had no power over Fhi- lofophers \ Origen replies, firji, that Vhilofophy was no fuch charm againft the power of Magick, as appears by M^ragenes who writ the fiory of Apollonim Tyanem^ the famous Magi- cian and Fhilofopher^ who therein mentions how Euphrates and an Epicurean (ix. ct^H? (piKoavfpoi, no vulgar Fhilofophers ) were catched by the Magick of Apollonim, (and although Philofiratm difbwn this Hifiory of M^ragenes as fabulous, yet he that thinks Vhilojiratus for that, to be of any greater credit, is .much deceived, of whom Z?r^. /^/i/^j gives this true charaBer, ^^ ^^^^' ^^fi- that he doth magna Homeri mendacia majoribus mendaciis cor- ^' rigere, mend one hole and make three,) but, faith Origen, as to thcChrifiians, this is undoubtedly true : A/A^^^cuyo^wTt 0 ^uii? Cont. cdf I 6, 'Twin ^^TTcvovTii ^hy ^ Ci'^vTii i0 TO ivAyyi^iov dvri r /. And this in the cafes pretended by the great Juglers and Impo- ftures of the Chrifiian worlds the Topifh Friefis have been fo - notorious^ that none of their own party of any great faith or "^ credit would ftand to z/^/^c/; them. And we have this impreg- nable argument againft all fuch ImpoftureSy that the matters which they by fuch anions would give an evidence to, being fo vafily different from, if not in fome things diametrically op- pofite to the firft delivery and defign of the Chrifiian faith, it is inconfifient with the n^/^jy ufed for the confirmation of Chrifii- an Religion in tht firft publifioing of it, to atteft the truth of fuch things by any r^^/ miracles : For lb it would invalidate the great /orc^ of the evidences of the truth of Chriftianity , if K k 2 the z^% Origines Sacra: Book II. the fame argument (hould be ufed for the proving o^ that which in the judgment of any impartial perfon was not delivered^ when the truth of the docfrine of Chrift was confirmed by lb many and uncontr^uled miracles. But hereby we fee what unconcei- vable prejudice hath been done to the true primitive doctrine of the Gofpel'y and. whcit fiumbling-blocks have been laid in the way of confiderative perfons^ to keep them from embracing the truly Udriftian faith ^ by thofe who would be thought the in- fallible direBors of men in />, by making ufe of the hroadfeal of Heaven ( fet only to the f r^/^/; of the Scriptures) to confirm. their unwritten ^nd fuperfiitiom ways of worjhip. For if I once fee that which I looked on as an undoubted evidence of Divine * /jorrer, brought to attefl: any r/;/>^ diredlly contrary to Divine revelation ; I muft either cojiclude that G'^i may contradiB him- felf by fealing both /^^rfi of a contradiBicn^ which is both blafphemom and impoffible ; or that that /^f /Vfj/ of wf;? which own fuch r/;i/?^/, is not at all tender of the /;^;?o^r oiChrifiian doBrinCy but feeks to fet up an interefi contrary to />, and - matters not what difadvantage is done to the grounds of i?e/i- ^f(yZ2 by fuch unworthy pretences ; and which of thele two is more rational and true^ let every one's confidence judge. And therefore it is much the inter eft of the Chrift ian World to have all fuch frauds and impoftures dilcovered, which do fb much differ vice to the Chrift ian Faith ^ and are fuch fiecret fio- menters of Atheifim and Infidelity. But how far that promifie Mat. i^. 17. of our Saviour^ Tliat they which believe in his name, fhall caft out Devils^ and do many miracles^ may extend even in theie laft ages of the world to fuch generous and primitive-fipirited Chrift iansy who out of a great and deep fienfie of the truth of Chrift ianity and tendernefis to thQ fiouls of wf», fliould go amoHg Heathens and Infidels to convert them only to C/;r//? (and not to ^ ihcuhr inter eft, under pretence of an infiallible head) is not here a /?/^6'f fully to enquire. I confels I cannot fee any rf/2/i>;2 why C/oi may not yet for the conviBion of Infidels^ em- ploy fuch a /?(?ii?fr of miracles^ although there be not fuch neceffiity of it, as there was in the firH propagation of the Gofipe/^ there being ibme evidences of the power of Chriftianity now, which were not fo clear then, ( as the over-throwing the King- dom of Satan in the world \ the prevailing of Chriftianity ^ mt- withftanding force ufed againft it \ the. recovery of it from ami4ft' ill Chap. 9 . The Trstth of Scnpture-Hifiory aJferteJ, 253 all the corruptions which were mixed with it ; the confmt ofthofe parties in the common foundations of Chriftianity^ which yet dif- agree from each other with great bit [ erne fs ofjpiritj though I' fay -it be not of that necejfity now, when the Scriptures are conveyed to us in a certain uninterrupted manner ; yet ijod may pleale out of his abundant provifion for the fatisfaaion of the minds of men, concerning the truth of Chriftian doarine, to employ good men to do fbmething which may mamfeji the power 6f Chrifi to be above the Devil's, whom they worjhip. And therefore I (hould far fooner believe the relation of the. - miracles of Xaverim and his Brethren, employed in the con- -ver/ion of Infidel f, th^n Ltpfim \i\^ Virgo Hallenfis and /Sfpre- collis, could it but be made evident to me that the defign of thofe perfons had more of Chrijlianity than Topery in it ; that is, that they went more upon a defign to bring xht fouls of the Infidels to Heaven, than to enlarge the authority and jurifdi^ion. of the Roman Church, Rut what-ever the /-n/f^ of thole miracles, or the ^^y/^zz of J*^^. B-j thole perfons were, we have certain and undoubted^ evidence of the rr«r/; ofthofe miracles, whereby Chrijiianity was firfl: /?r(?- pagated, and the Kingdom of Satan over- thrown in the world j C/;r//? thereby making it appear that his power was greater than the Devil's, who had pofejjion, becaufe he over-came /^/Vw, LuL11.21.22. took from him all his armour wherein he trufted, and divided his fpoils i i. e. difpojfefed him of mens bodies, and his. Idolatrom Temples, filenced his Oracles, nonplufi his Magicians, and at. laft, when Chrijlianity had overcome by fufering, w refined the. worldly^ Power and Empire out of the Devil's hands, and ^i«- ^/f?)'^^ it againft himfelf. Neither may we think, becaufe fince\ that time the Devil hath got fome ground in the world again by the large fpread of Mahomet ifm, and the general corruptions in the Chriftian world, that therefore the other wcu> no argument of Divine power -, becaufe the tritth of Chrifiianity is not tied' to any particular /?/arfx ; becaufe luch 3. falling away hath been- foretold in the Scripture , and therefore the truth of them is proved by it, and becaule God himlelf hath threatned that' thofe who will not receive the truth in the love of it, Ihall be given up to firong ddufio?is. Doth- not this then in fiead of abating xhtftrength of the argument, confirm it more, and riiat nothing is fallen out in the Chrifi ian world, but what was- ^54 Origines Sacm : Book 11. foretold by thofe whom God employed in the converting of it ? But we are neither without fome fair hopes even from that Divine revelation which was fealed by mco?2trouIed evi- dence^ that there may be yet a time to come when Chrift will recover his Churches to their priftine purity and fimplicity j but withall, I think w^e are not to meafure t]\^ future felicity of the Church by outward fplendor and greatnefs ( which too many fb ftrongly fanfie ) but by a recovery of that true fpirit of Chriftianity which breathed in the /r/ /Tg-^"/ of the Churchy what-ever the outward condition of the Church may be ; For if worldly greatnefs , and f^/^*, and riches^ were the firft im- pairers of the /?z/r/>j)' of chriftian Religion , it is hard to con^ ceive how the refioring of the Church of C/;r//? to its true glory^ can be by the advancing of ?^^^, which gives fo great an occafion to /r/ie and fenfualitjy which are lb contrary to the defign of Chrifiian Religion ; unlefs we fuppofe men free from thofe corruptions j which continual experience ftill tells the rr(?r/i the Rulers as well as Members of the Chrifiian focie-^ ty are y^/^yV^ to. Neither may that be wondered at, when fuch uneveftnefs of /jr/-/ is now difcovered in the great Lu- minaries of the worldy and the Sun himfelf is found to have his macula^ as though the Sun had a purple Fever ^ or as Kir- Propyl j^gonifl, cher exprefleth it, Ipfe Thcsbm^ qui rerum omnium in univerfo ad Oedipum, naturae Theatro afpeBabilium longe pulcherrimm omnium opini- cap' 2- f^y^Q ^jj; JQabitm^ hoc feculo tandem fumofa facie ^ ac infeBo vultH maculk prodiit j diceres eum variolis laborare fenefcentem : I Ipeak not this as though an outward flourijhing condition of • the Church were inconfifient with its purity ; for then the way to refine it, were to throw it into the flames of perfecution ; but that the advancement of the flourijhing condition of the Churchy is not merely by outward pomp md grandeur^ and that the purity of the Church is not inconfifient with a ftate of out- ward difficulties, which the experience of the Primitive Church gives an irrefragable demonftration of. Thus much may lerve to Ihew the neceffity of a power of miracles^ conjoyned with the Chriftian do^irine, ,to manifeft the truth of it by over- throwing the Kingdom of that great Antichrift the Devil^ who had ufurped fo much Tyranny over the World. The Chap. 9. the Truth of Scripture- H/Jlory ajferted. ^5-5 The laft reafon why a power of miracles was fo necelTary SeB. 9. for confirming the truth of the Gofpel, is, kcaufe the Go/pel was to be propagated over the world without any other rational evidence than wcvi contained in the miracles wrought for the con- firmation oHt Now the admirable //fci:^/} which this do(ftrine found in the world, confidering all the circumftances of it, do , make it clear what certainty there was that the miracles which were wrought were true^ and they were certain evidences that the doBrine attefted by them was from God. Now this will appear from thefe two things : ^ That no rational account can be given why the Apoftles jhould j^ undertake to publijh fetch a doclrine, unlefs they had been undoubt- , edly certain that the Docirine wa^ true, and they had fufficient evidence to perfitade others to believe it. That no fat isfaBory account can be given ^ confidering the na- ture of the doBrine of Chrifi^ and the manner of its propagation^ why itfiouldmeet with fo great acceptance in the world, had^here not been fuch convincing evidence as might fully perfuade men of the truth of it. I begin with the flrfi^ from the publijhers of this doBrine in . _; the world. All that I here require by way of a Pojiulatum or fuppofition, are only thefe two things, which no man right in his wits I fuppofe will deny : i. That men are fo far ratio- nal agents, that they will not fet upon any work of moment and difficulty, without fuffcient grounds inducing them to it ; and by fo much the greater the work is, the more fure and fiedfafi: had the grounds need to be which they proceed upon. 2. That the Apoftles or firft Tublijhers of the Chriftian DoBrine were not men diftraBed^ or bereft of their wits, but atled by principles \ of common fenfe, reafon and underftanding, as other men in the - ' world do : *^Which if any one Ihould be fo far befide his mts ] as to queftion, if he have hut patience and under ft anding enough ' \ to read and confider thofe admirable writings of theirs which I are conveyed to us by as certain uninterrupted a Tradition as any | thing in the world hath been , by that time he will fee caufe to alter his judgment, and to fay that they are not mad, but fpeak the words of the greateft truth and fobernefs. Thefe things " fuppofed, I now proceed to the proving of the thing in hand, which will be done by thefe three things ; Firft, That the Apoftles could not but know how hazardous an employment the preaching xjo vngtnes aacrce : dook 11. preaching of the Gofpel would be to them. Secondly, 7 hat no motive can he conceived fuffrcient for them to undertake fuch an ^employment, hut the infallible truth of the doBrine which they preached Thirdly, That the greatefi ajjurance they had them- f elves of the truth of their Doctrine^ wa^ by being eye-witneffes of the miracles of Chrijl, Firft, That the Jpofiles could not but underjiand the hazard of their employment^ notwithjianding which they cheerfully un- dertook it. That men armed with no external power^ nor cried up for their wit and learnings and carrying a doctrine with them fo contrary to the general incVmations of the worlds having nothing in it to recommend it to mankind but the truth of it, (hould go about to perfuade the world to purt with the Religion they owned^ and was fetled by their Laws^ and to smbrace fuch a Religion as called them off" from all the things they loved in this worlds and to prepare themfelves by mortifi- cation and felf'demal for another world, is a thing to humane reafon incredible^ unlefs v^q fuppofe them aded by a higher fpi- rit than mankind is ordinarily acfed by . For what is there fb ^ defirable in continual reproaches and contumelies ? what delight ' is there in racks and prifons ? what agreeahlenefs in flames and martyrdoms to make men undergo feme, nay all of thefe rather than difown that doBrine which they came to publijh f Yet thefe did the Jpofiles cheerfully undergo in order to the con- verfion of the world to the truth of that doBrine which they delivered to it. And not only ^o^ but though they did /^rt-- fee them, they were not difcouraged ivom this undertaking by it. I confefs, when men are upon hopes of profit ^nd inter eft •in the worlds engaged upon a dejign which they promife them- felves impunity in, having power on their fide, though after- wards things fliould fall out contrary to their expectation, fuch perfons may die in fuch a caufty becaufe they muft^ and fome may carry it out with more refolution, partly through an in- ■nate fortitude of fpirit, heightned with the advantages of Re- ligion, or an Enthufiaftick temper. But it is hard to conceive that fuch perfons would have undertaken fb hazardous an em- ployment, if before-hand they had fore-feen what they muft have under-gone for it. But now the Jpoftles did fore-know that bonds and impnfonment, nay death ic felf muft be under- ,gone in a violent manner^ for the fake of the doctrine whicli they chap. 9. The truth of Scripture-Hijiory ajferted. 25-7 they preached \ yet notwithftanding all this, they go boldly axnd with refolntion on with thdr work^ and give not over becaufe of any hardjhips and perjecutions they met withall. One of -the chiefeft of them, St. Peter^ and as forward as any inJo^^' *'• ^9 Preaching the Gofpel, had the very manner of his death fore- told him by Chrift himfelf, before his Afcenfwn ; yet foon af- ter we find him preaching Chrift in the midft of thofe who had crucified him, and telling them to their faces the great- nej^ of their fin in it, and appealing to the miracles which Chrift had done among them, and bidding them repent end be- A61. 2. 22,23, ■lieve in him whom they had crucified^ if ever they would be faved: . r^ ^^' And this he did, not only among the people who gave their '^' I5' ]'"' confent to the crucifying of Chrift \ but foon after, being ton- Aft. 4. /. vented, together with John^ before the Court of Sanhedrin ( probably the very fame which not long before had R-ntenced Chrift to death) for a miracle wrought by them^ with what Aft. 4- 10, 12. incredible boldnefs doth he to their /^ce*/ tdl them of their mur- dering Chrift ; and withall, that there was no other way to falvation but by him whom they had crucified ! Be it known unto you all ( faith Peter to the Sanhedrin) and to all the peo- ple qflfrael, that by the name ofjefus Chrift whom ye have cru- cified, ivhom God raifed from the dead, even by him doth thii man ft and here before you whole. Neither is tkre falvation in any other : for there^ is none other name under Heaven given a- mong men whereby we muft be faved, W hat an heroick freedom of fpir it appears in thefe words! what magnanimity and cou- rage was there now in thzt per fon, who durft in the face of this Court tell them of their murther, and that there w^as no falvation but by him whom they had crucified! Well might they wonder at the boldnefs of the men, who feared not the fame death which they had fo lately brought their Lord and Mafter to. Neither was this fingly the cafe of Peter and John, but all SeB, 10. the reft of the Apoftles undertook their work with the fame refolution and preparation of Spirit to undergo the greateft hardfhip in the world for the fake of the truths they Preached. And accordingly as far as Ecclefiaftital Hiftory can afcertain us of it, they did all but John ( and that to make good the pre- Joh. 21.22. diclion of Chnft) fufFer violent deaths by the hands of thofe who perfecuted them merely for their doclrin^. And v;hich is L 1 moft 158 Origines Sacral : Book II, moft obfervable, when Chrifi defigned them firft of all for this Matth. I a. 17, work J he told them before- hand of reproaches, perjhcutions^ all 18,21,22,28. manner of hardjhips^ nay oi death it felf, which they muft nn- derge for his fake. All that he gave them by way of ericnU' ragement^ was, that they could only kill the body and not the- foul^ and therefore that they fhould fear him only who could de- firoy both body and foul in Hell ; all the fupport they had, was,, an expectation in another world ^ and that animated them to go through all the hardflnps of this. Where do we ever read of any fuch boldnefs and courage in the moft knowing Thilofo- phers of the Heathens ? with what faintnefs and mifgiving of plat. Phad. mind doth Socrates fpeak in his famous difcourfe fuppofed to be made by him before his death ? how uncertainly doth he fpeak oi'd.fiate of immortality ? and yet in d\\ probability Plato let it forth with all advantages imaginable. Where do we ever find that ever any of the gv^dX. friends of Socrates^ v^'ho were prefent at his deaths as Th^edo^ CtbeSy Crito and Simmi/u^ durft enter the Areopagus^ and condemn them there for the- murther of Socrates^ though this would be far fhort of what the Jpofiles did ? why were they not fo charitable as to inform the world better of thofe grand truths of the being of God and immortality of Souls, if at lead they were fully convinced of them themfelves ? Why did not Tlato at \tdi?i fpeak out, and tell the world the truth, and not difguife his difcourfes under feigned names, the better to avoid accufation and the fate of Socrates ? how doth he mince his excellent matter, and plays as it were at Bo-peep with his Readers, fometimes appearing and then pulling in his horns again ? It may not be an impro- bable conjeBure that the death of Socrates was the foundation of the Academy : I mean of that cautelous do&rine of ipith- holding afent, and being both pro and con, fometimes of this Jide, and fometimes of /-te ; for Socrates his ^6-^^/; hath made all his friends \cvy fearful I of hdng too dogmatical. And P/^ra himfelf had too much riches, and withall too much of a Cour- tier in him to hazard the dear prifon of his foul, viz. /^aj /'(?iy, merely for an athereal vehicle. He had rather let \m foul flut- ter up and ^(^»^« in terre/lrial matter, or the c^^^ it w^^spent up in, than hazard too violent an opening of it by the /;/?;?i/ of the Areopagus. And the great i^(?;>^^;2 Orator, among the reft Qf Plato's fentiments, had toni^ this too 5 for although in his, difcour-- Chap. 9. The Truth of Scripture-Hijlory ajfertedju %^p difcourfes he hath many times fufficlently laid open the fo^^y of the Heathen worjhip and Theology^ yet he knows how to bring himfelf o& Mq enough with thQ people-, and will bQ fure to be dogmatical only in this, Timt nothing is to be innovated in the Religion of a Comm^onwealth , and that the cuftoms of our Ancejiors are inviolably to be obferved. ^'hich principle s^hzdi they been true as they were fafe for the perfcns who fpake them, the Chrijlian Religion had never gained any entertain- ^ went in the world \ for where-ever it came, it met with this potent prejudice that it \\ as looked on as an innovation, and therefore was flirewdly fufpefled by the Governours of Common- wealths, and the Preachers of it puniflied ^sfaSfiopi^ and fediti- cm perpns \ which was all the pretext the wife Yoliticians of the world had for their cruel and inhumane perfecutions of fuch multitudes of peaceable and innocent Chrijlians, Now when thefe things were fore-told by the /ipojiles themfelves before their ^o/;?g- abroad fo plainly, that with the fame /iz/V^ they did believe the do ferine they F reached to be true, they mufl: be^ lieve that all thefe things (liould come to pafs, what courage and magnanimity of fpirit was it in them thus to encounter dangers and as it w^ere court the flames ? Nay and before the time was come that they muft die, to feal the truth of their doBrine, their whole ///^ was a continual peregrination, where- > in they were as fo many 7^^/ in pilgrimage, encountred with /?m/j and dangers on every fide ; of which one of the mofl painfull and fuccefsfull, St, Faul^ hath given in fuch a large />- ^ Cor. 6. 4, 5, ventory of his /^^n'//, that the very reading of them w^ere c- 8,' 9! nough to rmdo a poor Epicurean Phihfopher, and at once to fpoil him of the two pillars of his happinefs, the quietnefs of his w/>/i and i^^/f of his body. Thus we fee what a hazardous imployment that was which the Jpoftles vvent upon, and that it was fuch as they very w^ll underftood the difficulty of be- fore they fet upon it. Secondly, tve cannot find out any rational motive which could Se^L i u carry them through fo hazardous an employment, but the full co?2- "vi Si ions of their minds of the undoubted truth and certainty of the doclrine which they delivered. We find before that no vul- gar motives in the world could carry them upon that defign which they went upon -, Could they be led by ambition and vain-glory, who m.et with fuch reproaches where-ever they L 1 2 ' ' • went ; z6o Origines Sacrce : Book ]h went ) and not only perfecutions of the tongue, but the fharper ones of the hands too ? we never read of any but the Primi^ tive Cbrifiims who were amhitiom of being Martyrs^ and thought long "till they were in the fames : which made Jrriii^ Jmonius being Tro-conful of AJia^ when Chriftians in multi- tudes befet his tribunal and thronged in to be condemned^ fay to /»«/. etiam damnati gra- Tertul. j^ol tm agunt^ they gave the Judges thanks that they thought f ^^' them worthy to lofe their lives in a caufe which they had reafon to triumph in, though they died for it. And when a- ny of than were apprehended^ they difcovered fo little fear of Minutif44 Felix. pMnijhment^ Vt mum folummodo quod non ante fmrint pxnite- ret^ That nothing troubled them fo much cu> that they had been Chriftians no fooner^ as one of their number fpeaks. And when the Heathens ufually fcblfed at them and called them Sarmentitii and Semaxii becaufe they were burned upon the • Crofs^ one of them in the name of the refl anfwers, Hie eft TertuUp, cap. habit US z'itlori^ noftr^^ h^c palmata veftis^ tali curru trium^ ^ ' phamus ; The Crofs was only their triumphant Chariot^ which carried them Iboner to Heaven. Now this courage and refo- ktion offpirit which was feen in the ^vH planfers o[ Chrifii- anity in the world, made dllferiom and inquifitive perfons look more narrowly into thofe things, which made men ftight fo much the common bug-bears of humane* nature J-^jf^T/'/^f/ and Id. ih. d^ath, ^is enim non contemplatione ejm concutitur^ ad requi- rendum quid intu6 in re fit ? quis non ubi requifvit accedit ? ubi acceffit pati exoptat? ThdQ fujferings mad^ men enquire ; this enquiry made them believe ; that belief made them as willing to fuffer thewfelves as they had feen others do it before them. Thus it appeared to be true in them, Exquifitior qu^cque cru- delitaSj ilkcebra mag'ts eft fe^^e ; plures efticimitr quoties metimur a vobis ; femen eft fangim Chriftianorum ; Tfje cruelty of the^r enemies did but increafe their number j the harveft of their pre- tended juftice was but the feed- time of Chriftianity^ and no feed wa^fo fruit full a^ that which wmfteeped in the blood of Martyrs, Thence Juftin Martyr ingenuoufly faith of himfelf , That while he was a Tlatonick Vhilofophir^ he derided and fcoffed at the chriftians ; but when he confidered their great courage and conftancy in dying for their profejfwn^ he could not think thofe could poflibly be men wicked and voluptuom, who when off'ers of life were made them, would rather choole death than deny Chrift, By wliich he found plainly that there was a higher fpir it in LhrijHanity than could be obr:iif)e(] by tliC fub- lime moi ions and Jpecnnitio?7s of .'latOy and t;;it a pocl- iprroi'ant Chriftian would do and faffcr more for the fake of c/;//y/i:han any chap. 9. The truth of Scripture-Hiflory ajferteclr x^5 any of the Academy in defence of their rnafter Plato Now fincc all men naturally dhhov faferi'/igs, what is it which fhould fo powerfully alter the iiaturednd difpofition of Chriftians above all other perfons, that they alone fliould feem in that to have forgot humanity^ that not only with patience^ but with ;^/ they endured torments and abode tliQ flames f What ! were they all poffefed with a far more than Stoical Apothy^ that no (enle of pain could work at all upon them ? or were they all b^- fitted cind infatuated perfons that did not know what it was they underwe7it ? It is true fbme of the more blind and wit- full Heathens derided them as fuch ; but who were the more infatuated^ let any fober perfon judge : they who flight- ed and rejected a doctrine of (b great concernment^ which came attefted with fo much refolution and courage in the pro- fejfors of it ; or they who were fo far perfuaded of the truth of it, that they would rather die than deny it ? Dicimus & TmullA^.es^^. palam dicimus^ & vobii torquentibus lacerati & cruenti vocife- ^^'- ramur^ Deum colimus per Chriftiim. They were not a(hamed ' to believe in the blood of Chrtft even when their own blood ran down before their eyes^ and confefs Chrifi with their mouths when their bodies were upon the rack. Certainly then there were ibme VQvy powerfull and convincing arguments which buoy- ed up the fpirits of true Chrifiians in that deluge of Offerings which they were to fwim through ; it mud be zftrovg and well-grounded faith whfch would hold out under fo great tryals^ and they could not be to feek for the mod perfuafrve motives to faith, who were fo ready to give an account to others of the hope that was in them, and to perfuade all oth^v perfons to the embracing of it. With what face and confidence otherwife could they perjkade men to embrace a doBrine fo dangerous as • that was, had there not been motives fufficient to bear up a- gainft the weight o^fufferings, and arguments perfuafrve to con^ vince them of the undoubted certainty of that doBrine which they encouraged them to believe ? Now that which appears to have been the main ground o{ Seclr, j^, fatisfaBion to the Pyimitive Chrifiians as to the truth and cer- tainty of the Docirine of Chrifi^ was this. That the Dottrine of the Gofpelw^s at firft delivered to the world by thofe per- fons who were themfelves eye-wit?ieffes of all the miracles which our Saviour wrought in. confirmation of the truth of what he fpake,. ^6^ ; X)rigines Sacr^ : Book If. fpdke. They were fuch perfons who had been themfelves pre- fent^ not only to hear moft of our Savioufs admirable difcour^ fes when he w^as in the worlds but to fee all thofe glorious things which were done by him, to make it appear that he was immediately lent from God, Let us now appeal to our own faculties^ and examine a little w^hat rational evidence could poffi- hly be defired, that the do5irine of the Go//?^/ was m^f, which God did not afford to the world ? What could the perfons who were the auditors of our Saviour defire more as an evi- dence that he came from God^ than his ^^i;?^ luch things which were certainly above any created power ^ either huma??e or dia- holicalj and therefore muft needs be Divine ? What could o- ther perfons defire more who were not prefent at the doing of thefe miracles^ but that the report of them ihould be conveyed to them in an undoubted manner by thcfe perfons who W'ere eye-witneffes of them, and made it ^/i/?^ jr to the world they were far from any intention o{ deceiving it ? Now this makes the Jpofiles themfelves in their own writings (though they were divinely infpired) appeal to the rational evidence of the truth of the things in that they were delivered bythem who were eye-witneffes of them. There St. Veter fpeaks thus to the :2 Pet r. 16. difperfed Jtws^ « i^ mazitpKrtMVoii ^o9o/< *cJ^ctY.oK^^,lan.v7ii iyv'ae}' ou.^ v/MV Tiji' 'ra Kt/eA» ^jmr 'I«<78 Xg/j-d J^JveifMu x^ 'Tra^aoieu^, aAA.* gTrsV- 7flw •)?^h;&^'i'-'J5^ '^ &}t5i;/« (uy^h^oh^Q-. J^^or we have not followed cun- ningly-devifed fables^ when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jefus Chrifi^ but were eye-witneffes of his Majefty. The power and coming ofChrifi which the Jpofile fpeaks of, w^as not as fbme improbably conceive, either his ge- Tieral coming to judgment upon the worlds or his particular • coming upon the Nation of the Jews ; but by an Hendyades, by his power and coming is meant hh powerfull appearance in the world, whereby he mightily difcovered him (elf to be the Son of God. Now this, faith the Jpofile, was no (nav(pt(7fj^Q^ fxvBQ-, not like the Heathen Mythology concerning the Tct^aaica and ^(pccn'ictt of their Gods among them (which were fo frequent- Antiq.Li,pag. ly believed among them, that Bionyfius Halicarnaffaius con- J^8- demns the Epicureans, becauie they did deride -mi ^(pctvzia.^ v^f :^av, the appearances of their Gods in the world ) now, faith the Jpofile, aflure your fclves, this is no fuch appearance of a God on Earth as that among the Heathens was ; for, faith he, we Chap. 9. The Truth of Scripture-Hijiory ajferted, 'z6^ we our felves who declare thefe things were I'd'^Tai, we fully underftood this {Aiyauv^eiov^ this great myftery ofgodlinefs, God ■mamfefi in the flefijy for we law his ^iyi^KHo-m^, that great ma- ^jefty which attended him in all which he [pake or did ; we faw ^all thofe (jm-^aKiitt rk 05K, the great things of God ^ which were A£c. i.-n- manifeft in him , all thofe miraculous operations which were wrought by him. Therefore as this was a great confirmation of -the faith of the Apoflles themfelves that they faw all thefe things^ fb we fee it was of great concernment to the world in order to their belief that the Gofpel was no cunningly-d^vifed fable, in that it was delivered by luch who were sttcVto/, eye- witneffes of what they declared. To the fame purpole St. John •fpeaks ad conciliandam fidem^ to make it appear how true what they delivered was, in the entrance of his Epijile ; Tijat which i Joh.r. 1,^,3 . was from the beginning , which we have heardy which we have feen with our eyes y which we have looked tipon^ and our hands have handled of the word of life , (for the life was manifefledj and we have feen it y and bear witnefs, and Jhew unto you that eternal life which was with the father , and wa^ manifefied unto m) That which we have feen and heard, declare we unto you. We lee what great force and weight the Apofile lays upon this, that they delivered nothing but what they had feen and heard ; as they heard the docirine of Chrifl, lb they faw the miracles which he wrought in confirmation of it. St. Luke likewife in tht beginning of his Gofpel declares that he intended to write Luk. r. r, 2,5 nothing but what he had perfe^ underftanding of from fuch per~ fons who had been a.tjTO'UTv.t, cye-witnejfes and infiruments them- felves in part of what was written, for that is meant by v^^^a/ sS Koyn : and thofe things which were written, he faith were TSTAH^tpofw^tV'* c^ ^fju^-'isT^y [/.AT ct, thlngs which are abundantly proved to be true ; f(# being matters offa^, there could be no ftronger proof of them, than by fuch who were eye-witnejfes of what they fbake. And this we find the Jpofiles themfelves very cautiom a out, in the choice of a new Jpoftle in the room oi Judas, wherefore of thefe men which have companied with us, ^£^^ j^ j, 2: all the time that the Lord Jefm went in and out among us, be- ginning from tk: baptifm of John, n^Jo that fame day that he was taken from its, mufi one be ordair.ed to he a witnefs of his refurreition : For, becaufe Chrif ras mightily declared to be th£ Son of God by his refurreciion from the dead^ (as that which M m was z66 Origtnes Sacrc:^ : Book II. was the great Seal of our Saviour's being the Son of God there- fore we find the Apoftles fo frequently attefting the truth of the refurredion of Chrifi^ and that themfelves were eye-xvitneffes Ad. 2. 32. of it. Tlois Jefu6^ faith P^^fr, hath Godraifed up, whereof we all are witneffes. And again, And killed the Prince of life, whom 3. 15. God hath raifed up from the dead, whereof we are witnejfes -, and both Feter and John to the Sanhedrin ; For we cannot but 4- -O' fpeak the things which we havefeen and heard. And the whole Col ledge of A po files afterwards, And we are his witnejfes of ^' 32. thefe things, andfo is alfo the Holy Ghofi, whom God hath given to them that obey him. In which words they give them that twofold rational evidence which did manifeft the undoubted truth of what they fpake ; for they deUvered nothing but what themfelves w^ere witnejfes of, and withall was declared to be true by the power of the Holy Ghojl in the miracles which were wrought by and upon believers. Afterwards we read the fum of the Apoftles Preaching, and the manner ufed by them to perfuade men of the truth of it, in the words of Feter to 10, 3Pp4o, 41, Cornelim and hi^ company, How God anointed Jefm of Nazareth 4^- with the Holy Ghoft and with power, who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppreffed of the Devil, for God was with him : And we are witnejfes of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews and in Hierufdem, whom they few and hanged on a tree : Him God raifed up the third day, and Jhewed him openly, not to all the people, but unto witnejfes chofen before of God, even to m who did eat and drink with him after he rofe from the dead. And he commanded us to preach unto the people, that it IS he which w/u ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead. By all which we fee what care God was plealed to take for the jatpsfatlion of the world ir^oint of rational evi- dence, as to the truth of the matters much were difcovered [\ concerning our Saviour Chrift, becaufe he made choice of fuch I perfons to be the preachers and writers of thefe things who were the beft able to fati^fie the rvorld about them, viz, fuch ' ' as had been eye-wit nejfes of them. Se^. 14. Now in order to the making it more fully evident what ftrength there was in this Teftimony given by the Apoftles to the miracles of Chrift, we fliall more fully manifeft the rational II evidence which attended it in thefe following propofitions. Prop, I, Where the truth of a doUrine depends upon a matter offaB, the truth chap. 9. Tlje Truth of Scnpture-Hiflory ajferte^, 267 truth' of the dochine is fufficiently manifefted^ if the matter of faEi he evidently proved in the higheji way it is capable of. Thus it is ill reference to the do Brine of Chrifi ; for the truth of that is fo intervfoven with the truth of thQ fiory of Chrifi^ that if the rebtions concerning Chrifi be true^ his dodrine muft needs be divine and infallihle. For if it be undoubtedly true^ that there was fuch a perfon as Chrifi horn at Eethlehem^ who did fo many jniracles, and at lafi fuffered the death of :he Crofs^'* and after he had lain three days in the grave rofe .^(ain from the dead^ what re^/)?2 imaginable can I have, to qmfliony but that the Tefiimony of this /jfr/p;; was certainly Divine^ and conlequently what-ever he preached to the world was mofl: certain and undoubted truth. So that if we have clear evi- dence as to the truth of th^ib pajfages concerning our Saviour, we muft likewiie believe his doU^rine^ which came attejied with fuch pregnant evidences of a Divine commiffion wliich he had from G(?(i to the w^^^r/i. No Pr/;2ce can think he hath any rea- fon to refufe audience to an Embajfador, when he finds his Cre- dentials fuch as he may rely upon^ although hiJnfelfdoth not fee the fealing of them ; much lefs reafon have we to qneflion the ^r//?/; of the doctrine of the Gf?//??/, if we have fufficient evidence of the truth of the matters of /^(^ concerning Chrifi, in fuch a way as thofe z-/;/;?^/ are oupable of being proved. Thegreatefi evidence which can be given to a matter offaB, is Prop. 1. the {ittefting of it by thofe perfons who were eye-witnejfes of it. This is the Foundation w^hereon the firmeft affent is built, as to any matter of fad: ; for although we conceive we have reafon to fufpeB the truth of a fiory, as long as it is conveyed only in a 'general way, by an uncertain fame and tradition 5 yet when it c^wf/ to be attejied by a fufficient number of credible perfons who profefs themfelves the eye-witnejfes of it, it is accounted an unreafonable thi?2g to difirufi any longer the /rz//-/; of it \ efpe- cially in thefe two cafes, i. f^/;^?'/ the matter they bear witnefs to is a thing which they might eafily and clearly perceive, 2. When many witneffes exacily agree in the fame Tefiimony, I. TVhen the matter it fe If is of that nature that it may be fully perceived by thofe who faw it: i, e, if it be a common objea- of fenfe. And thus it certainly was as to the perfon and acfions of Jefus Chrifi, For he was of the fame nature with mankind ; and they had as great evidence that they converfed with Jefm Mm 2 Chrifi r 2-6 S Ortgines Sacrce s Book ID Chr'ijt in theflejl), as we can have that we corMverfe one with a- nether. The miracles of {^hrijl were real and znfihle miracles ; . they could be no illufwns of fenfes^ nor deceits of thek f)'^/ 5 the ;«z7;2 who was born blind and rwrf^i by our Saviour^ was ib?(?TP» to have been bo^n blind through all the Country , and his cure was after as publick as his blindnefs before, and ac- Joh, 9. 26. knowledged by the preateft enemies of Chrift at the time of Luk. 7. 12. its being done. "When Chrifi raifed up the dead manixt Naim^ it was before much- people^ and fuch perfons in probability who. were many of them prefent at his death. But left there might be any fufpicion as to him, that he n?^ not really dead, the Joh. II. 39. cj/^ is plain .and beyond all dijpute in Lazarm, who had been' to the knowledge of all persons thereabouts dead four days ; here could be no deceit at all when th^ftone was r^/rr/fi Jirj^, and^ Lazarm came forth in the prefence of r//d?w ^//. And yet' fur- ther the death and /^/z///^^/ of our Saviour was a plain object of j^;?y^ done in prefence of his greateft adverfaries. The yt^/^/ii- fri themlelves were fufficient witnejfes of his being really dead when they came to break his to^*/, and fpared him becaule they faw he was dead already. At his refurred:ion the fio?2e was r^^rp/^i away from the Sepulchre and no /'^^ found therein, al- though the Sepulchre was guarded by fouldiers, and the D//?/- /)/6'j of C/jr//? all ,(b fearfuU, that they were difperfed up and ^^j^« in feveral /j/jc^"/. And that it was the feme real body which he rofe withall, and no aereal vehicle, appears by Tho- mas his fcrupulofity and unbelief who would ?20t believe unlefs he Joh. 20. 25,27. might put his hands into the hole of his fide, and fee in his hands the print of the nails 5 now our Saviour condeicending lb far as to fatlsfie the incredulity of Thom.'u, hath made it thereby evident that the body which our Saviour rofe from the grave with, was the fkmQ individual body which before was crucified and buried in the Sepulchre, And we find all the yipoftles to- gether upon our Saviour's appearance to them after his refur- retiion, io far from. being credulom in embracing z phantafm in- ftead ofChrifly that they fufpeBed that it was either a mere phantafm, or an evilfpirit which appeared among them \ up- Luk. 24. 37. on which it is laid, they were terrified and affrighted, and fup^ pofed they had feen afpirit. Which our Saviour could not beat them off from, but by appealing to the judgment of thm fen- 39', y^-S Handle me and fee) for afpirit hath not fie jh. and. boms as ye fee CHap. 9. The Truth of Scripture Hiflory afferted. ' %'^y fee me have ; and afterwards moreiully to convince them, he did eat in the midft of them. Now the more frfpiciom and in- ^.3. credulous the Apofiles themlelves ^tfirft were., the greater ^t7- dence is it how /^r they were from any defign of abufing the world in what they after preached unto it, and what ftrong conviElion there was in the thing it felf, which w^as able to fa- tisfe {\iq\\ fcrupidous dXidi fufpicious "^^v^om, 2. l^Vhen many witnefes concurr in the fame Tefiimony. No- thing can difparage more the truth of a tefiimony ^ than the- counter-vpitncfi of fuch who \wQrtprefent at the fame aclions y but when all the witnejfes fully ^^r^^ not only in the fubftance, but in all material circuniflances of the y?^ry, what ground or*' r^^y2>;z can there be to fufpeB ^ forgery or deftgn in it; efpecially when the pcrfons cannot by any fears or threatnings be brought ' to vary from each cf/;^r in it \ Thus it is in our prefent cafcy we find no real diffent at all mentioned either as to the birth j' miracles^ life, death, or refurreBion ofjefus Chrifi ; all the wit-- nefes attefi the fame things, though writing in different places^ ■ and upon different occafwns ; no alteration in any circumflance • of the flory, out of any defign oipleajing or gratifying zny per ^ fons by it. Moft of our Saviour s miracles, not only his Jpo- files, but the people and his very enemies were witneffes of,' whofe pojleritj to this day dare not ^6"^;;)/ the truth of fuch^ firange works which Vv^ere wrought by him. And for his re- furreBion, it would be very fir ange th^t five hundred perfons' Ihould all agree in the fame thi?2g, and that no torments or death could bring any of them to i6'^{)' the truth of it, had there' not been the greateft certainty in its There can he no reafon to fufpect fuch a tefiimony which 'is given' SeB, 14\ by eye-wit nefes, but either frmi queftioning their knowledge ofthe^ pm. things they f pake of, or their fidelity in reporting them. Now there' is not the Icaft ground to doubt either of thefe, in reference to^ thoit per fons wmo gave tefiimony to tYi^ world concerning the- ferfon and aBions of our bleffed Saviour. For firfi:, They were fuch as were intimately converfant hotU ' with the perfon and aliions ofjefus Chrifi -, whom he had cho-- ien znd trained up for that very end, that they might he fuffi- ciently qualified to acquaint the world with the truth of things concerning himfelf after his refurreciion from the dead. And •accordingly they followed him up and down wherefoever he* weut\ 3= 27^ Origines Sacr^ : Book IL went ; they were with him in his fditudes and retirements, and had thereby occafton to obferve all his atlions^ and to take ;26^/V^ of the unfpotted innocency of his life. Some of his Lifciples were with /;/V/2 in his transfiguration^ others in his ^^tf;?jy and bloody Jweat, they heard the expreffions which came from his mouth ; in all which he difcovered a wonderfuH fubmijfum to the 15^77/ of Goi, and a great readinefs of mind to fuffer for the^^^^ of the world. Now therefore the firft thing cannot at all be quefiionedy their means of knowing the truth of what they fpake, •i. Neither, fecondly^ is there any reafon to fufpeB their fidelity I. in reporting what they hew r For, i . The truth of this dotlrine wrought fo far upon them., that they parted with all their worldly fubfiftence for the fake of it: Although their riches were not great, yet their way of fubfiflence in the world was neceffary ; they left their houfes, thdr wives and children, and all for Chriji, and that not to gain any higher preferments in this world ( which had they done, it would have rendred their de- fign fufpicious to the curious and inquifitive world) but they let go at lead a ^///V/' and eafie life, for one moft troublefome and dangerous. So that it is not, how much they parted withall, but how freely they ^/i it, and with what chearfulnefs they »?;- derwent difgraces, perfecutions, nay ^^^/-Z; it ielf for xhtfake of the Gofpel. Now can it be imagined, that ever ???^/? were fo prodigal of their ^^/^ and lives, as to f/;r(;B? both of them away \^ upon a f/?/>;^ which themfelves were not fully affured of the rr/ff/? of? It had been the higheft folly imaginable, to have de- ceived themfelves in a thing of (b great m.oment to them, as the truth of the ^^^n>i^ which they preached was ; becaufe all their hopes and happinefs depended upon the truth of -that do^rine which they preached. And as Tertullian obferves, Non fas eft ulli de fu^ religione mentiri ; for, faith he, he that fays he wor^ ' fhips any thing befides what he doth, he denies what he doth wor- fhip, and transfers his worfhip upon another, and thereby doth not worfhip that which he thm denies -, Befides, what probability is there men fliould lye for the fake of that Religion which tells them that thofe which do fo fliall not receive the reward which is promifed to thofe who cordially adhere unto it ! Nay, they 1 Cor. 15. 19. declared themfelves to be the moft miferable of all perfons if their hopes were only in this prefent life. Can we now think that any who had the common reafon of men^ would part with all the content- chap. 9. The truth of Scripture-Hijiory ajferted. 271 contentments of this worlds and expofe themfelves to continual hazards^ and at laft undergo death it /e-// for the fake of /(?w^- thing which was ;^«^y^/y the fiction of their own ^r^z?^/ f What iliouid make f/;^w fo fcdulou^ and indufiriom in preaching fuch ^te^j that they coiM fay necejfity was laid Jipon them, yea, wo i Cor. 9. i5. ?r^j unto them if they preached not the Gofpel, wh^n yet they fdw fo many woes attending them in the preaching of it, had there not been fome more powerfull attractive in the beauty and ex- cellency of the doclrine which they preached^ than any could be in the eafe and tranquillity of this prefent worlds Thus we fee the fidelity of the Apofiles manifefted in fuch a tt^^ as no other wit?2effes were ever yet willing to hazard theirs. And therefore Orig;e??i defervedly condemns C^//^ of a ridiculom im- l.^.c Qdfur,^ pertinency, when he would parallel the relations of Herodotus^' ^^^' and Pindams concerning Arijieus Troconnefius with thole of th^Jpoftles concerning C^rf/^ ; For, faith he, did either ofthefe two venture their lives upon the truth of what they writ concern- ing him, as the Apofiles did to attefi the truth of what they preach- ed concerning our Lord and Saviour Jefus Chrift ? 2. The fidelity of the Apofiles is evident in their manner of Setf, 16^ . reporting the things which they deliver. For if ever there may be any thing gathered from the manner of exprejien, or the tdBQ- ^ Koy^, concerning the particular temper and difpoji^ tion of thQperfon from whom it comes, we may certainly ^^adu the greateft fidelity in the Apofiles from the peculiar manner 01 their expreffing themlelves to the world, Wiiich they do, • I . jvith the greatefi impartiality : not declaring only what Wd.^ glorious and admirable to the world, but what they knew would be accounted fooUfionefs by it. They who had fought only to have been admired for the rare difcoveries which they brought to the world, would htfure to conceal 2iny thing which might be accounted ridiculous -, but the Apofiles fixed them- felves mofi on what was moft contemptible in the eyes of the world, and what they were mofi: mocked and derided for, that they delighted moft in the preaching of, which was the Crofs of Chrifl^ Paul was lb much in love with this, which was a fiumbling-block to the Jews, and foolijhnefs to the Greeks, that , Qov. 2 « he valued the knowledge of nothing elfe in comparifon of the know- Phil, -^.sf ledge ofchrifi and him crucified. Nay he elfewhere faith, God Gal. 6. forbid that Ifhould glory fave in the Crofs ofChrifi, What now lliould 14. ■^^^ Origines Sacra : Book IT. iliouid be the reafon that they ftould rejoyce in that moft which was moft defpkabie to the world, had not they ieen far greater trHth and excellency in it, than in the^oft CuhlimQ fpecMlati- ens concerning Godov the/3«/i of men in the School of Flato •or any other Heathen Fhilofophers > That all men fhould be •hound in order to their falvation, to believe in one who was ^crucified at Hierufalem^ was a ftrange doBrine to the unbelie- -ving world : but if the Apoftles had but endeavoured to have fuited their doBrine to the School of Vlato^ what rare peribos -might they have been accounted among the Heathen Philofo- phers ! Had they;only in general terms difcourfed of the Be- nignity of the Divine nature^ and the Manifeftations of Divine goodnefs in the world, and that, in order to the bringing of the fouls of men to a nearer participation of the Divine nature, the perfedl /i^^ of true goodnefs, and the exprefs image of the />er- Jt);? of God, and the refplendency of his glory had -z/e/V^i himfelf in Humane nature, and had every-wherejc^r^-er^i fuch ^f^wj of light md goodnefs, as warmed and invigorated the frozen fpi- rits of w^« with higher fentiments of G(?i and themfelves, and r^//^^ them up above the feculency of this terrefirial matter to breathe in a /r^^r ^/>, and converfe with more ;?o^/> objeBs, and by degrees to /^ the j^k/j of W2^« for thole more /^wr^" illapfes of real goodnefs, which might always fat is fie the y^j^/ / deftres, and yet ^/zj^^jyj- ^f ^/? /■/?6'w ///? 'till the j^/^/ (hould be funning it felf to all ^/■^•rw/i^' under the immediate beams of Lfg;/;/- and Love: And that after this Incarnate Deity had j'/7r^^i abroad the wings of his Love for a t??^//^' upon this lower world, 'till by his gentle Jjeat and incubation he had quickned the more pliable ir^r/i to ibme ^^^re^ of a Divine Life, he then retreated himfelf back again into thtfuperiour world, and put off that veil by which he made himillf known to thole who are here confined to the prifons of their ^(?&/ .- Thus, I fay, had the 'Jpoftles minded applaufe among the admired Fhilofophers of the Henthnis^ how -eafie had it. been for them to have made fome confiderable ad- ditions to their higheft fpeculations, and have left out any tling which might feem Co mean and contemptible as tiic death (if the Son of God ! But this they were fo far from, that the main thing which they preached to the world, was, the vanity of humane wifdom without Chrift, and the necejjjty of all men's be- Jie.ving in that Jefiis who was crucified at Hiernfalem, The Chap. 9. The Truth of Scripture- Htflory ajjerteet. zji The Apoftles indeed difcover very muchy infinitely more than ever the moft lofty Flatonifi could do, concerning the goodneff and love of God to mankind ; but that wherein they manifel^ed the love of God to the worlds wcu>y that he gave his only-begotten Joh, 3/1^. Son^ that whofoever believeth in himfhould not perijh but have everlafting life. And that herein was the Love of God manifefted^ Rom. 5, 8. that while we were yet /inner s^ Chrijl died for us. And that this wa6 the greatef^ truth and worthy of all acceptation^ that Jefm i Tim. i. is:. Chrifi came into the world to fave finners. They never dreamt of any Divine goodnefs \^h[ch fhould imk^ men happy without Chrijl : No, it was their defign to perfuade the world t\\?it all the communications oi God's goodnefs to the world were wholly in and through Jefm Chrifi^ -, and it is impojfible that any fliould think otherwife^ unlels Vlato knew more of the mind of God than our bleffed Saviour ^ and Plotinm than Saint Paul. Can we think now that the Jpoftles fliould hazard the reputation of their • own wits ^o much as they did to the worlds and be accounted bablers, and fools^ and mad-men^ for preaching the way of falva- tion to be only by a perfon crucified between two thieves at Hie- rufalem, had they not been convinced not only of the truth but importance of it, and that it concerned men as much to believe it, as it did to avoid eternal mifery ? Did Saint Paul preach ever the lefs the words of truth and fobernefs, becaufe he was told to his face that his Learning had made him mad ? But if he was befides himfelf it was for Chrifi ; and what wonder was it if the Love of Chrifi^ in the Jpofile fhould make him wjjling to lofe his reputation for him, ieeing Chriji made himfelf of no reputation, that he might be in a capacity to do us goods' We fee the Apofiles were not afhamed of the Gofpel ofchnfl^ becaufe they knew it was the power of God to falvation, and therefore neither in thdv preaching or their writings would they om.'t any of thofe paffages concerning our Saviours death, which might be accounted the mofl: difhonourable to his pet fin. Which is certainly as great an evidence of thdrfidtlity as can be expect- ed; which makes Origen fay that the Difcipkb of (' hiji writ all things ^^/ActAwdry? «5 kvyva^vo>^,with a great deal of candor and l. 3. c. Celf. love of truth, k^ v?r2;cA»4aj/T5f 'f TTiti a'uTS '5>%-:cA^k l^eJ^A^ 7^ JhK'^V' Ttti 7?oAAoT< cfJojovhjj TTef Koyq> 'T^ %e457:«'wf q>{^i-!v- not concealing from the world hofe pajp?ges of the life of Chrifi, which would be accounted moflfoolifh and ridiculous. N n 2. mtb ^74 Origmes Sacra : Book II. T. TFith the greateji plainnefs and fimplicity rf fpeech. Such whofe defign is to impofe upon the minds of ;/2^« with fome cunningly'davifed fables^ love as much ambiguity as ever y^^f>//^ did in his moft winding Oracles^ of whom it is^id, Amhage nexa Delphico mos efl Deo Arcana tegere. In 4. Mneid, Servim tells us, that Jupiter Ammon was therefore piclured with Rams-horns, becaufe his anfrvers had as many turnings and windings as they had. But the horns which Mofes was wont to be pictured with, did only note light and perfpicuity (from the ambiguity of ]1p, which notes t\i^ fending forth of rayes of light like a horn J and yet Mofes himfclf was veiled in comparifon of the opennefs and plainnefs oi fpeech which was in the Apoflks. Impofiors caft a w//^ of many dark and c/(?«<3^ »?^rJi before them^ but when they are once brought into the (>pf-« light y their vizard falls off, and their deformity appears. Such perfons delight in foaring quite out of the apprehenftons of r/;(?/^ who follow them, and never think themfelves better recompenfed for their /^^i^/, than when they are moft admired and leaft underfiood. But never was Chriftianity more i//^j- nouredy than when men brought it from its native fimplicity and plainnefs^ into a company of c^^^ and infignificant ex- preffions^ wliich are fo far from making men better underftand the truth of it, that it was certainly the Devil's defign by fuch obfcure terms to make way for a myftery to be advanced, (but it was of iniquity J and foon after, we fee the ejfeB of it in another Oracle fet up at Rome inftead of Delphos ; and all the pretence of it, was the obfcurity fuppofed in Scripture. What ! darknefs come by the rifing of the Suni Or is the 5'«ff at laft grown fo beggarly^ that he \sfain to borrow light of the JE'^rf/? f Muft the Scripture be beholding to the Church for its elearneffj and C/?ri?/? himfelf not fpeak intelligibly^ unlefs the P/>/?f be his Interpreter ? Did C7;r//^ r^i/^j/ to the world the way to falvationy and yet leave men to /^^^y^ which was it, 'till a G«/i^ never heard of in the Scripture come to dire^ them in the way to it ? What ftrange witnejfes were the Apoftles^ if they did not fpeak the truth with plaimefss' How had men been to^fi^ as to the /r^/-/? of Chriftianity, if the Apoftles had not declared chap. 9. the Truth of Scripture-Hiflory ajferteJ, ij^f declared the doBrine of the Gofpel with all evidence and per/pi- cutty ? Whom muft we believe in this cafe, the Apoflles or the Roman Oracle? The Jpofiles they tell us they /peak with all'i- Cor. 3. 12. plainnefs of fpeech, and for that end purpofely lay afide all ex- ' ^^^' ^- '»4- cellency of words and humarie wifdom^ that men might not be ta * ^' "^^ 3? 4- feek for their meaning in a matter of {6 great moment ; that f ^^ G'(?/p^/ rj?/w /;/i to none but fuch as are loft^ and whofe eyes are blinded by the God of this world ; that the dotirine revealed by them is a light to dired us in our way to Heaven, and a rule to walk by ; and it is a ftrange property of light to be obfcure^ and of a r/ct Ta75 /2s^»AMc3a/ SiJkeaking to the faces of their greateft adverfaries. The Apoftles neither feared- the Jews skill in their Law^ nor the wifdom Rnd fubtilty of the Creeks : Saint Paul preacheth Chrift openly among the Jews in their Synagogues^ and among the Athenians he encounters the Epicureans and Stoicks, and preacheth to them Jefu6 and A£l. 17. 18^. the refurreBion. If the Apoftles had any thing of deceivers in r^f //i, as to the r/7/>?^/ they related concerning Chrift^ they would not certainly have ^(?/^e;z with fo much confidence concerning Chrift in the prefeme of ^/^^yi" who had been his murtherers ; but we fee they appealed to themfelves^ as to the miracles which' he had wrought among them, and for his refurreBion they were ready to lay down their lives in giving teftimony to the truth of it. That his body was gone, was evident; that the Apoftles fliould take it jit'^)' was impojfible^ confidering what a ^f/^ri offouldiers they had fet /^/7^« it, and how timorous and fearfull the Apoftles were, that they fied upon Chrift s being ap- prehended. Now what could it be, could make fuch fearfull' perfons afterwards fo courageom and refolute as they were, had there not been fome more than ordinary power to convince and t:ncourage them ? 4: The. ayS Origines Sacra : Book IL -. 4. The Apofiks deliver their Teftirr.ony with the grmeft par^ ticularity m to all circumftances. They do not cha??ge or alter any of" them upon different examinations before feveral perfons ; they all agree in the greatefl conjiancy to themfelves and unifor- mity With each other. As to matters of indifferency^ we find the Jpojiles very yielding and condefcending \ bat as to any f/7/'»^ which concerned their tejiimony, moft conftant and rf- foived. Had the Goj^d been Ibme cunniyigly-contrived fancy ^ it had been impoffiUe but fo many different perfons^ in fuch diffe- rent /?/^r6'j, and under fuch different conditions^ would have 'Varied as to fome material circumfiance of it : Or elfe they would have been fo wife as to have delivered it m general terms^ without infifting much on fuch particular circumflanceSy which if they had been falfe, might have been very eafily di^roved y but with what particular enumeration of circumftances do the j4pofiles preach Chrift to the world ? Teter tells the J^n?j that A£l:. 2. 22. it was Jefm (?/Nazareth ti'/?^?^ /;^ preached ; and left they (liould think it was not the fame perfon who rofe again ; with great boldnefs and freedom of Jj>irit he faith to theni, Therefore let 2.36. all the houfe of Ifrael know ajfuredly that God hath made that fame jefm whom ye have crucified^ both Lord and Chriji. Yea that fame individual perfon who was converfant in the worlds and* 5. 31,32. died upon the Crofs^ is now become a Prince and Saviour to give repentance to Ifrael and remijfion of fins. If there had been any ground of fufpcion as to thel^ things^ who had been fo able to dijf'rove them, or fo ready to do it, as thofe perfons who had crucified him ? For we cannot conceive but thofe who had a hand in his death, would endeavour by all poflible ;?2f^«j- to disprove his refurreliion from the dead. For what a cafe were they like to be in, if thofe things which the Apofiles fo confidently preached were true ? If C/jr//? /;^^ all power now in his hands, and there were fdvation in no other name^ but only in his whom they had crucified^ they were like to be in a moft dej}erate con- dition ; therefore if any men can be fuppofcd inqmfitive after the truth of thefe circumfiances, no doubt thefe were : And if they could h^vQ found the kadfiaw in their tefiimony^xht world would (bon have ringed of it ; and the Jews who were then fo much differfed abroad, would have divulged it into all parts, tlie Apoflles would have been told of it as they preached Chrifi in the Synagogues. And can we in any reafon think, but thofe Jews >^, Chap. 9. the truth of Scripture- Hiflory ajferted, 179 '^ews who perfecuted ?aul as he preached in the Synagogues of Afta^ and afterwards impeached him fo openly at Jerufakm^ would there enquire into all thtdrcumftances concerning C/[?r//^, and all the other 7^^-^ would write to thdr friends at Jfrufa- lem to be fully informed o{ thoib fir ange things which were told f ibf ^ ^/?ew/y in all places in their Synagogues by men of their own Nation and Language^ concerning one J^/^ who was crucified and ri?/^ again from the i^^i. Had there been now any fo much as plaufible pretext XhdX any of thefe circumftances were not true, can we think but that a people fo unmeafurably given to their own T^^j'i and traditions^ would in sll pWj have umted any thing that might have tended to the difparagement of Chrift and - his Apoftlesf But we fee w^//V^ it felf could not find ^nyflaxp in the Apoftles teftimony ; for if it had, we fhould certainly have beard of it, either from the Jews^ or from the great oppoferr of Chriftianity among the Heathens y who pretended to be curt- 0U6 and inquifttive perfons^ fuch as Ce//^, Julian^ Hierocles and Porphyrie were. What re^/o;^ can we have /-^^-^ in the leafi to yi^^c^ fuch a Teftimony which pafled fo uncofitrouled in that time when it was alone cjp^^/^ of being difproved^ and men*s intereft and f/^_/?^« would put them fo much upon it ? The ftrength of which will appear from the next propofttion ^ _ which is, No Teftimony ought to he taken againft a matter of faB thus SeB. 17. atteftedy but from fuch perfons who had greater knowledge of the Prop. 4. things atteftedy and manifeft greater fidelity in reporting them. It is eafie to make it appear, that fuppofing any perfons at that time had contradicted the Teftimony of the Apoftles concerning our Saviour^ yet there had been no reafm in the world to have hearkned to their Teftimony in oppofition to that of the Apoftles-, and that on thefe accounts, i. The Apoftles witnelfed the Affirmative^ which is more capable of being attefted than any Negative can be. 2. The Apoftles were more converfant with Chrifi than any other perfons were, becaufe they were chofen for that very end by him to be conftantly with him : could any therefore be more capable of knowing the truth of all particulars concerning c hrift than thefe were ? Had there been 2Lny ground of j«/pic/o» concerning the defign of Chrifi, why could not the Jews prevail with Juda^ to difcover it as well as to betray his ferfon f Judas had done but a good work if C^//^ had been : •.. fuch iSo Origines Sacrte : Book II, fuch an impoflor as the Jews blafphemoufly (aid he was : what made Judas then fo little fatkfied with his work^ that he grew weary of his life upon it, and threw himfelf away in the moft horrid defpair f No per/on certainly had been fo fii: to have been produced as a witnefs againft Chrifi^ as Judas who had been fo long with him, and had heard his fpeeches and obferved his miracks ; but he had not patience enough to ftay after that horrid faB to be a witnefs againft him : nay he was the grcateft witnefs at that time for hiniy when he who had betrayed him came to the Sanhedrin when confulting about his deaths and Mat. 27. J. told them that he had finned in betraying innocent blood. What poffible evidence could have been given more in behalf of our Saviour than that was ? When a perfon fo covetous as to be- tray his Mafler for thirty pieces of y//z/fr, was fo weary of his - bargain that he comes and throws back the money ^ and declares ^ the perfon innocent whom he had betrayed? And this pirfon too was fuch a one as knew our Saviour far ^^rr^r than any of the witnejfes whom afterwards th^y fuborned againft him, who yet contradiBed each other ; and at laft could produce nothing which in the judgment of the Heathen Governour could make him judge Chrifi worthy of death. ;. The Jpofiles were freer from defign than any counter- witnefs at that time could be, we have already proved the Jpofiles could not poffibly have any other motive to affirm what they did, but full conviBion of the truth of what they [pake ; but now if any among the Jews at that time had aferted any thing contrary to the Apoftles^ We have a clear account of it, and what motive might i«i«cff them to it ; viz, the preferving of their /?tf»^«r and reputation with the p^c*;?/^, the upholding their traditions^ befides their open and declared e«w/>jy againft Chrifi without any fufficient reafbn at all for it ; now who would believe the Tefiimony of the Scribes and Pharifees who had fo great authority among the people y which they were like to lofe^ if Chriji's doBrine were ?rz?^, before that of the Jpofiles who parted with all for the fake ofChnft^ and ventured themfelves wholly upon the truth of our Saviours doBrine? 4. None ever did fo much to atteft; the Negative^ as the Jpofiles did to prove thdr fidelity as to the Afiirmative. Had fufficient counter-witnefs been timely produ- ced^ we cannot thinkth^ Jpofiles would have r«« fb many c^»- tinual hazards in Preaching the rto^i which related to th^ per- fon ^ chap. 9. Tl^e Truth of Scripture- Hiflory ajfertect. i8r fon and aBions of Chrift, Did ever any lay down their lives to undeceive the rr^r/i if the Apoftles were ^«i/(;)' of abuling it? 5. The number of fuch perfons had been inconfiderable in c^w- parifon of ?^^y^ who were fb fully perfuaded of the /r^/-^ of thofe r/;/;2^i which concern our Saviour ; who were all rejiy (as moft of them did) to feal the truth of them with their H^es. Whence (hould lb many men grow ibfuddenly confident of the truth of fuch ?/;i;?^/ which were contrary to their for- mer perfuafions^ interefi^ education^ had they not been delivered in rfuch a way^ that they were ajfured of the undoubted truth of them ? which brings me to the laft propofition^ which is. Matters of fail being firft believed on the account of eye-wit- SeB, 18, ne^es^ and received with an univerfal and uncontroukd affent by all ^^°^' ^' fuch perfons who have thought themfelves concerned in knowing the , truth of therUy do yield a fujfcient foundation for a firm affent to be built Mpon, I take it for granted that there \s fufficient foun^ dation for a firm affent^ where there can be no reafon given to quefiion the evidence ; which that there is not in this present cafe^ will appear from thefe following confederations. I, That the multitudes of thofe perfons who did believe thefe things^ had liberty and opportunity to be fat is fie d of the truth of them before they believed them. Therefore no reafon or motive can be affigned^ on which they fhould be induced to believe thefe things^ but the undoubted evidence of truth which went along with them. I confels in Mahumetifm a very great num- ber of perfons have for fome centuries o^ years continued in the belief oi the doBrine of Mahomet ; but then withall there is a fufficient account to h^ given of that, viz. the power ofthefivord which keeps them in awe, and ftridly forbids all the followers of Mahomet to difpute their religion at all, or compare it with any other. Therefore I can no more wonder at this, than I do to fee io great a part of the world under the Tyranny of the great Turk : Neither on the other fide do I wonder that fuch ^multitude of thofe prof effing Chriftianity (hould together with it, believe a great number of erroneous doBrines, and live in the praBice of many grofs fuperfiitionSy becaule I confider what a ftrange prevalency education hath upon fofter fpirits and more eape intellectuals^ and what an awe an Inquifition bears upon timorous and irrefolved perfons. But now when a great multi- tude 0^ perfons fiber and inquifitive, Ihall contrary to the prin- O 0 ciples I I 2.8 a.. Or igtnes Sacra; : Book II; ctples of their education^ and without /^jr of any humane/^rr^, (which they before-hand/^^ will perfecute them) and after dili- gent enquiryvrndit into the ^r(}//«(Yj on which they believe, for- fake all their former perfuafmis, and refolvedly adhere to the trnth of the doctrine propounded to them, though it coft them their lives.\ if this give us not reafm to think this doBrine true, we' mud believe mankind to be the moft unhappy creatures in the world \ that will with fo much refolution part with all advan- tages of this life for Xhtfake of one to come, if that be not un- doubtedly certain, and the doBrine propofmg it infallibly true. It is an obfervable circumjfance.m Xh^ propagation oichrifiian Reli- gion, that though God made choice at tirft ofperfons generally of mean rank and condition in the world to be Preachers of the I. Cor. 2. s- Gofpel, Cor/ thereby making it appear that our faith did notfiand Gor.i. 27. /;2 /-/j^" wifdom of men, but in the power of God, and therefore f/?f?/^ r/j^ TT^tf;^ things of the world to confound the flrong ; yet loon after the Gofpel was preached abroad in the world, we find perfons of gvQ^t place and reputatioyi, of great /^^r/"/ and abilities engaged in th^ prof effion of the Chrifiian Faith, In the Hifiory of the Y^^/ we read of Sergim a Pro-conful, of Dionyfeus the Areopagite converted to Xh^ faith, and in the following ^^a of the Church many perfons of great f/?f ^w for their excellent learning -and abilities -, fuch \wasjujliri Martyr, on^ who before; he became a Chrifiian, was converfant with all ^S^f?/ of P/;/7o- fophers, Stoicks, Peripateticks, Pythagoreans, and at laft was a- profefled Platonifi'tiW he was converted from Vlato to Chriji^ and then found that ^r^^ which he fpeaks of in his Dialogue with Trypho, that after all his enquiries into Phdofophy, fpeak- . ing of the DoBrine of C/?ri/^ tavtUu ^vIjj ivex^yjov '^nKo^nxp'^oM ^tV- Tr^^h' t^viz. 9*^*^ 71^ ^ (wi^(p^esvy 1 foujid thls at lafl to be the only fur e and pro- #«'. Par,' fit able Philofophy, And when Trypho after derides him as a r«j« of very eafie faith, who would leave the doBrme of Plato for. that of. Chrifl, (for it feems by him the Jews then had a more favourable opinion of tliQ fiate of Platonifts than Chriflians) Ju- ftin is fb far from being m^Jt/^-i with fuch reproaches, that he tells him he would undertake to demonfirate to him, or/ « Mvoi'i ^U ^ Jl'ycty.H (^^vaiTi, }y j^^Koai ^tiTi : that the Chrifiians did not give credit to empty fables, and unprovable affertions, but to fuch, 'a do^rine as was full of a Divine fpirit and power ^ and fiourijl^ed >1,' chap. Cf\ The Truth-^ Scrtpture-Hiflory ajJerteJ. 183 flourijhed with grace : The proving of which is the fubjed of that difcourfe. At Alexandria we meet with a fucceJJio7i of exr celknt perfonSj all which were not only embracers thcmfelves, but defenders of the Chriftian faith \ for fet ting afide there A- biliuSy Jujlus^ Cerdo^ Eumenes, Mauits^ Celadion^ Agrippinm ^Ju^ lianm, Demetrim^ and others who flourijhed about the fecond Century^ I (hall only /;f on thofe perfons, who WQYQfamom en- quirers after truth, and noted for excellency in Heathen learning \ yet thefe perfons after all their enquiries found nothing to fix on but the Chrifiian faith, and valued no other difcovery of truth in comparifon with that. Such was Pantanm^ who as Eu- fehim tells us, was an excellent Stoick before he became aChri- fiian, and was after fo eminent a one, that in imitation of the Apoftles he went into /« well m Divine learning. How excellent Pant^nu^ w^s in Humane learning, may appear in Eufb.l.e.c. lo. that Origen and Hierome both make his example their //^^ for th€ ftudying of it. After him fucceeded Clemens Ale x an- drinus, V ant anus his Scholar, a perfbn of great depth of /e'^r;^- /V;^ 'dud exqui/itely skiird in d.\\ Heathen Antiquities, as appears by his remaining writings. The Learning of Origen is fufBci- erntly known, which was in fuch great reputation in his own ^i/T^e-, that not only Chrifii ans -hwt Philofophers flocked to his Leciures at Alexandria as Eufehius tells us , w^herein he read hiji. l.6.e.\% the Mathematicks, and other p^r^j of Philofophy as well as the Scriptures ; and tiie fame ^«^/;^r informs us that the Philofo- phers did dedicate their ^£'(?/^/ to him, and fometimes chofe him - as arbitrator between them in matters of difpute •, and Porphy- rie himfelf in his books again ft the Chriftians vouch fafed a high encomium of Origen for his excellent learning. In Grigens time Her ados a Presbyter of Alexandria for five jyf ^r/ together /r^- quented the Schools of the Philofophers, and put on the Fhilofo- phickpallium, ^iQhict -n ^KKImcov ^^ )(p J^Jva^juv » '7retv{\cu »? Tctj/Tcf^y;? ao^;/ ;<5 '7ra,t//;;2(?;;^ was vccdvQd by perfons inqHifitive zkcc Sell, 19, the truth of things^ fo f /?6' doBrine conveyed by it wcUi a matter of the highefi moment in the world : and therefore we cannot conceive but perfons ordinarily inquifnive about other things would be more than ordinarily fo about this, becauie their eternal welfare and happinefs did depend upon it. All perfons that are truly religious^ muft at leaft be allowed to be perfons very inquifitive after the fiate and condition of thQir fouls when they fhall be dijlodged from their bodies. And if we do but grant this^ can we in any reafon think that fuch a multitude of per ^ fins in fo many ages fhould continue venturing thdv fouls upon a Teftimony which they had no ajfurance of the ^r/^rZ; of? And that none of all thefe perfons^ though men otherwile rational ^nd judicious , fhould be able to difcover thQ falfity of that dotirine they went upon, if at leaft any upon confederation of it can imagine it to be fo ? It is not reconcilable with the general prefumption of Humane nature concQrmngDivine providence and the r^r^ God takes of the welfare of r/?f ;?, to fuffer fo many per- fins who fencerely defer e to ferve God in the way which is moH pleafing to /;/>/z, to ^(7 (?;/ in fuch a continual delufeon^ and never have it at all difcoveredio them. If all then who have believed the doclrine of C/;r//^ to be the only way to falvat ion have beea deceived J either we muft ^i?;y altogether a Divine Providence-y or lay the D^i;// hath ;?2^r(? power to deceive men than God ta ^/r^*^ them, which is worfe than the former ; or elfe ^]/^rr that there are no fuch things at all as either God or Devils^ but that all things come to /'^/f by chance and fortune ; and if ibj it is fiill more inexplicable why fuch multitudes of rational and ferious men, and the moft inquifetive part of the rr^^r/^ as to fuch things Ihould all be fopojfejfed with the m^r/; and certainty of thefe things : and the movQ profane^ wicked and ignorant any perfons are, the more prone they are to mock and deride them; If fuch w^;? then fee more into truth and reafon than tht fiber '^nd judicious part of mankind^ let us bid ^^/V^ to humanity and ^/?^ it had eaten into the /;^^rf of the Roman Empire^ and made fo large ^fpread therein, that it made Ter- ^poh^. cap. ^6. tullian fay," Hefterni fumus^ & vejira omnia implevimns^ urbesy infulas^ caftella^ municipia, conciliahula^ caftra ipfa^ tribus, decuriaSy palatium, fenatum^ forum \ fola vobi6 relinquiwus Templa. M e have but mwly appeared^ faith he, and yet we have filed all pla^ ces with our company^ but only your > tmples ; -and before fpeak- ing of the Heathens, Obfejfam vvcijerantur civitatem^ in agris^ J in Caftellis^ in infuli^ Chrift ianos, omnemfrxum, atatem^ conditic- nem^ etiam dignitatem tranfgredi ad hoc nomen qua ft detriment o mcsrent. All forts and conditions of men in all places, were fud- denly become Chrift ians. What common tye could there be now to unite all thefe per funs together, if we fet afide the un- doubted truth and j:ertainty of the do5irine q{ Chrift which was iirft preached to them by fuch who were eye-witneffes of Chrift's anions, and had left facred records behind them , containing the fubftance of the doBrine of Chrift and thoie admirable in- ftrutlions which were their only certain guides in the way to Heaven f 4. Becaufe many per fons do-joyn in this confent with true Chri- ftianSy who yet could heartily irijh that the do Br ire of Chrift i a- nity were not true. Such are all thole perfons who are fenfual in their lives, and walk not according to the rules of the Gofpel^ yet dare not queftionov deny the truth of it. Such who could heartily wifto there \scxq wo future ft ate, r\ov judgment to come ^ that they might indulge tbemfeives in this world mthout fear of another y yet their confciences are fo far convinced of, and awed chap. 9. The Truth of Scripture- Htflory ajferted, 187 awed by the trnth of thefe things y that they raife many per- plexities and anxieties in their minds which they would moft willingly be rid of ; which they can never throughly be/till in- ftead of having the name of ChriftianSy they come to live the ///6' of ChrifiianSy and become experimentally acquainted with the truth and /7or^^r of Religion, And withall we find that the more men have been acquainted with the praBice ofChriftia- nityy the greater evidence they have had of the triah of it, and been more fully and rationally perfuaded of it. To fuch ' I grant there are fuch powerfull evidences of the truth of the doBrine of chrifi by the effeBual workings of the Spirit of God upon their i^«//, that all other argument Sy as to their own fa- tisfatiiony may hWjhort of thefe. As to which, thofe verfes of the Voet DanteSy rendred into Latin by F. S, are very per^ tinent and fignificant ; for when he had introduced the Apoftle Feiery asking him what it was which h.is. faith v^zs, founded: on, he anfwers, Deinde exivit ex luce profunda ^^ illic fplendebat pretiofa gemma Super quam omnis virtm fundatur, h e. That God waspkafed by immediate revelation ofhimfelfy to difcover that divine truth to the world whereon our faith doth ftmd as on its fure foundation ; but when the Apojile goes on to enquire how he knew this came at frft from Gody his anfwer to that is, larga pluvia Spiritm SanBiy qu^ efi dijfufa Super veteres & fuper novas membranasy Ejf fyllogifmus i lie qui earn mihi conclufit Aieo acntiy ut pra ilia demonjiratione Omnii demonfiratia alia mihi videatur ohtufa, i. c. That the Spirit of God doth fo fully difcover it felf both in the Old and New Tefiamenty that all other arguments are but dull and heavy if compared with this. It is true they are fo to a truly inlightmd confcience which difcovers fo much beauty and glory in the SjcriptureSy that they raviJbtlK foul^ although it be unable i88 Origines Sacra : Book II. mahle to give fo full an account of thts unto others who want the eyes to y^*^ that ^^rzwfy with, which a /;^^r^ tvw\y graciom hath. We /f ^ ordinarily in the world, that the attraBion of ^^/7;/f)' is an unaccountable thing •, and ^«^ may difcern that which ravijheth him, which another looks on as mean and ordinary ; and why may it not Z-^" much more thus in ^/V/>2^ objeBs which want fpiritual eyes to difcover them ? Therefore I grant that ^ooi /;/6';2 enjoy that fatufaBion to their own Confciences, as to the truth of the Docirine of Chrifi, which others cannot attain to ; but yet I lay, th^tfuch do likewife fee the moft/r^;?^, r^, ^/^«j/ and convincing evidence which doth /W//r^ them to be- lieve ; which evidence is then moft convincing , when it is fe- conded by the peculiar energy of the Sp/r//* of God upon the y^«/y of tvuQ Believers But yet we fee that the power and /(?rf ^ of the truth of thefe things may be lb ^r^j/*, even upon fuch minds which are not yet moulded into the fajhion of /r^^ goodnefs, that it may ^rr^ with its light and clearnefs, where it , , doth not /often and ^//-d-r by its to/- and influence. Now whence can it be that fuch conviitions (hould flick fo //^/^ in the ininds of ^/;q/^? who would fain pull out thofe piercing arrows, but that there is a greater /7(?w7fr in them than they are mafiers of, and they cannot y?^«i againft the force whereby they come upon them ; nor find any falve to c«r^ the wounds w^hich are w^^^ within them, but by thofe weapons which were the caufes of them ? And therefore when wicked perfons under conflitis of confcience, cannot f^)^ themfelves by dired Atheifm, or finding rf j/cj« to c^y? off fuch conviBions by difcerning any invalidity in the Tefiimony whereon the /-rz/r^ of thefe ^/;/;?^/ depends, it is a certain argument that there is abundant rrw/-/; in that Teflimonyy when men would fain perfuade themfelves to believe the f(?»- rr^rj', and yet cannot, 5. The ?r«r/; of this confent appears, from the unanimity of it among thofe perfons who have yet fi'rangely differed from each 0- ther in many controverftes in Religion. We fee thereby this unanimity is no forced or deftgned thing, becaufe wey^^ tht per- fons agreeing in this, do very much difagree from each other in other things. And the fame grounds and reafons whereon they difagree as to other things, would have held as to thefe too, were there not greater evidence of the certainty of thefe things than of thofe they fall out about. It hath not yet become a quefiion ■^ chap. 9. The Truth of Scripture- Hlflory ajferted, 189 quefiion among thofe who differ fo much about the fence of Scripture y whether the Scripture its fe If be the iVord of God, al- though the very accounts on which we are to believe It to be fo, hath been the fubjetf of no mean Controverfies, All the divi- ded parts of the Chriftian world do yet fully agree in the mat- ters of facf, viz. that there was fuch a perfon as Jefm Chrifiy and that he did many great miracles^ that he died on the Crofs at Jerufalem, and rofe again from the dead ; now thefe contain the great foundations of Chriftian faith , and therefore the multitude of other controverfies in the world ought to be {ofar from weakning our faith, as to the truth of the doctrine of Chrift (which men of weak judgments and AtheifticalJ^irits pretend ) that it ought to be ^ftrong confirmation of it, when we fee perfon s which fo peevifhly quarrel with each other a- boat fome infer iour and kfs weighty parts of Religion, do yet unanimoufly confent in the principal foundations of Chriftian faith, and fuch whereon the necejjity 0^ faith and obedience, as the way to falvation, doth more immediately depend. And this may be one great reafon why the infinitely wife God may fuffer fuch lamentable contentions and divifions to be in the Chriftian world, that thereby inquifitive perfons may /e-^ that if Religion had been a mere ^^y/^;2 of fome fQ\w politick perfons, the quarrel- fome world (where it is not held in by force) would never have confented fo long in the owning fuch common principles which all the other Controverfies are built upon. And although it be continually feen that in divided parties, one is apt to run from any thing which is received by the othr, and men gene- rally think they can never r?f;2 far enough from ^kr/2 whofe er- rours they have difcovered, that yet this principle hath not c/zr- r/>i any confiderable /?^rry of the Chrijiian world (out of their indignation againft thofe great corruptions which have crept into the world under a pretence of Religion) to the difowning the foundation of Chriftian faith, muft be partly imputed to. the fignal hand of Divine providence, and partly to thofe ftrong evi- dences which there are of the truth of that Teftimony which conveys to us thQ foundations of Chriftian faith. Thus we fee now, how great and uncontrouled this f^/z/e-^f is, as. to the matters of f^l delivered down from the eye-ivitnejfes of them, concerning the ^J/^^j- and miracles of our ^/^jJ^J Saviour, (which are contained in the Scriptures as anthnntical records of P p them,) i.5 o Origines Sacral : Book IR them,)' and what a fure foundation there is for a firm ajfent to the truth of the /■/;i;?^/ from fo univerfal and uninterrupted 3. tradition. ScB, 20. Thus far we have now^ manifeRed the neceJTity of tlie mira- cles of Chrifi^ in order to the prcpas^ation of Chrifiia?iity in the w^orld, from the confideration of the perfons who were to pro- pagate it in the world ; the next thing we are to confider, is, the admirable fuccefs which the Gofpel met with in the world up- on its being preached to it : Of which no rationaF account can be given, unlefs the aciions and miracles of our Saviour were molT undoubtedly true. That the Gofpel of Chrifi had very ftrange and wonderfull fuccefs upon its firft preaching, hath been partly difcovered already, and is withall {b plain from the long continuance of it in thefe European parts, that none any ways converfant in the hiftory of former ages^ can have any ground to queftion it. But that t\\\^firange and admira- ble fuccefs of the doFtrine of Chrifi lliould be an evidence of the J'ruth of it, and the miracles wrought in confirmation of it, will appear from thefe two confiderations. i. That the doBrine its felf was fo direBly contrary to the general inclinations of the world. 2. That the propagation of it was fo much oppofedby all worldly fower, I . That the doBrine its felf wa^ fo cppofite to the general in- clinations of the world. The doBrine may be confidered either as to its credenda^ or matters of faith ^ or as to its agcnda^ov mat- ters of life and pra^ice ; both thefe were contrary to the incli- nations of the world ; the former feemed hard and incredible^ the latter harfl^ and impoffible. I. The matters of faith which were to be believed by the world, were not fuch things which we may imagine the vuU gar fort of men would be very forward to run after, nor very greedy to imbrace. i. Becaufe contrary to the principles of their education^ and the Religion they were brought up in ; the genera- lity of mankind is very tenacious of thok pri?2ciples and preju- dices which are fucked in in the time of Infancy. There are fome Religions one would think it were impoffible that any ra- tional men fhould believe them ; but only on this account^ be- caufe they are bred up under them. It is a very great advan- tage any Religion hath againft another, that it comes to fpeak firfl^ and thereby infinuates fuch an apprehenfion of its felf to the. n chap. 9* The Truth of Scripture- ITiflory qfferted, 29! the mindy that it is very hard removing it afterwards. The mderftanding feems to be of the nature of thofe things which are communis juris, and th^rdovQ pri mi funt pojjident is -, when an opinion hath once got pojfejfion of the mind, it ufually keeps out what-ever comes to difturb it. Now we cannot otherwife conceive but all thoie perfons who had been bred up under Taganifm and the moft grols Idolatry, muft needs have a very t potent prejudice againft fuch a docfrine which was wholly irre- * concilable with that Religion which they had been devoted to. Now the ftronger the prejudice is which is conveyed into men's minds by thQ force of education, the g\X2ittv ftrength and /^oii^^r muft there needs be in the Gojp^l ofChrifi, which did fo eafily demolifh thefe firong holds, and captivate the underftandings of men to the obedience of C/^r//?. To which purpofe Arno- him excellently fpeaks in thefe words to the Heathens -, Sed non credit is gefta hac. Sed qui ea confpicati funt fieri & fub oculis ^rnoh.c. genes fuis viderunt agi, teftes optimi certijfimique au^tores, & credide- /• i. runt hac ipfi, & credenda pofteris nobis haud exilibm cum appro- hationibm tradiderunt, ^linam ifti fortajfe quaritis ? gentes, populi, nationes & incredulum illud genm humanum, ^tod nifi aperta res ejfet, & luce ipfa quemadmodum dicitur clarior, nun- quam rebus hujufmodi credulitatis fu^e commodarent ajfenfum. An, nunquid dicemus illius temporis homines ufque adeo fuijfe vanos^ mendaces,ftolidos, brutos, ut qu<£ nunquam viderant vidijfe fe fin- gerent ? & quA faBa omnino non erant falfis proderent tefiimo- niis aut fuerili ajfertione firmarent ? Cumque pojfent vobifcum & unanimiter vivere, & inojfenfas ducere conjun^iones, gratuita fufciperent odia & execrabili haberentur in nomine f ^odfifalfa ut dicitis hiftoria ilia rerurn efi, unde tarn brevi tempore totm mundm ifta religione completm eft / Aut in unam coire qui potue- runt mentem gentes regiontbm dijfita, ventis coelique convexioni- bus dimot^ f AJfeverationibus ille^a funt nudts, induB;a in fpes j caffas, & in pericula capitis immittere fe fponte temeraria defpe- I ratione voluerunt, cum nihil tale vidijfent quod eas in hos cultm mvitatis fu^ pofjit excitare miraculo, Jmo quia hac omnia ab ipfo cernebant gtri 0- ab ejmpraconibus qui per orbem totiim miffi beneficia patris & munera fanandis animis hominibufque portabant, veritatis ipfius vi viBte, & dederunt fe Deo, nee in magnis po- fuere dtfpendiis membra vobis projicere, & vifcera fua lanianda pr^ebere. The fubftance of whofe difcourfe is, that it is im- P p 1 po0k ii. 29 X Origines Sacrae : Book II. pojjihk to fuppofe fo many perfons of fo many Nations to be ib fer kfotted and infatuated^ as not only to Z'fZ/Vz'^ a Religion to be ?rw^ which was contrary to that they were educated in, but to venture their //t^i as well as ^/^m upon it, had it not been difcovered to them in a moft certain and infallible way by fuch who had been eye-witnejfes of the actions and miracles of C/;r//? c.gentes Ub.i. '^^^ his Jpoftks, And as he elfewhere fpcaks, /"y/ hac faltem f ^4. ^J^w vobisfaciant argument a credendi quod jam per omnes terras ' in tarn brevi tempore & parvo immenfi nominis huj us fa'cr amenta difufa funt ; quod nulla jam natio eft tarn barbari moris, & man- fuetudinem n^fciens^ qua non ejm amore verfa molliverit ajjerita- tern fuam^ & in placidos fenfm afumpta tranquillitate migraverit ; quod tam magnis ingeniis pr^^diti Oratores, Grammatici, Rheto- res, Confulti juris ac Medici^ Vhilofophidn, etiam fecreta riman- tes, magifteria hac expetunt^J^ret^ quibm paulo ante fidebant,&c. Will not this perfuade the world what firm foundation the faith ofCbriftians (lands on, when in fo (hort^time it is fpread over all parts of the world f that by it the moft inhumane and barbarom Nations ciXQfoftned into more than civility^ That men o{x\\Q great eft wits ?indi parts. Orators ^Grammarians, Rhetorici- ans, Lawyers, Phyficians, Fhilofophers, who not? h^VQ forfaken their former fentiments, and adhered to the doBrine of Chrift. Now, I fay, if tht power of education be {o ftrong upon the ininds of men to perfuade them of the truth of the Religion they are bred up under, (which Atheiftically difpofed perfons make fo much advantage of,) this is fo far from weakning the truth of Chriftianity, that it proves a great confirmation of it, becaule it obtained fo much upon its firft Preaching in the world, not- withftanding the higheft prejudices from education were againft it. If then men be fo prone to believe that to be moft true, which they have been educated under, it muft argue a more than ordinary evidence and power in that Religion which un- fettles fo much the principles of education, as to m^ktmen not only queftion the rrwr/; of them, but to renounce them , and . embrace a Religion contrary to them, SeB. 11. Efpecially when we withall confider what ftrong holds thefe principles o{ education were backed with among theH6'jf/7e'»j,when the dottrine of C/^r//? was firft divulged among them, i. ^. what ^\'a\M)kprete}^ces they had of continuing in the Religion which they were brought up in, and why they (liould not exchange it for Chriftianity J and thofe were, i. Tbs Chap. 9. The Truth of Scripture- Hiflory ajferted, 293 I . T]ie pretended antiquity of their religion above the Chri- Tertul. ad Nat. fiian \ the main thing pleaded againft the Chrifiians was divor- ^- '• ^^P- ^o- tium ab inftitutis majorum, that they thought themfelves wifer ^/^^^^^^^^^ ^' than their fore- fathers j and Symmachm, Lybanim^ and others, Lyban.ora't. de plead this moil in behalf of Vaganifm ; fervanda efi tot fceculis Tem^lis^ fides, & fequendi funt nobis parent es qui fecutifunt felicittr fuos ; their religion pleaded prefcription againft any other, and they were refolved to follow the fieps of their Jncefiors wherein they thought themfelves happy and fecure. Ca:cilim in Minn- Minut, FelLfi ' tim Felix iirft argues much againft dogmatizing in religion, but ?• ^• withall fays it moft becomes a lover oi truths Majorum excipere difciplinam, religiones tr adit as colere, deos quos ^ parentibus ante imbutus es timer e j nee de nnminibus ferre fententiamjed priori- bus credere. So Jrnobius tells us the main thing objeifted a- y^rmk c. gent, gainft the Chrifiians was novellam ejfe religionem nofiram, & /. 2. ^ag, 90. ante dies natam propemodum paucos, neque vos potuijfe antequam & patriam linquere, & in barbaros ritus peregrinofque traduci. And Cotta in Tully long before, laid this down as the main De mt. Deorum principle of Pagan-religion, majoribus no fir is etiam nulla ratione l- 3- reddita credere, to believe the tradition of our Fathers^ although there be no evidence in reafon for it : And after he had difco- vered the vanity of the Stoical arguments dbout P^eligion^ con- . eludes with this as the only thing he refolved his Religion into, Mihi unum fat is erit, major es noftros it a tradidife, It is enough for me that it comes by tradition fr-om our fore-fathers. Lacian- tius fully fets forth the manner of pleading ufed by the Heathens LaBant. de om againft the Chrifiia?is in the point of antiquity. H^ funt reli- rig. error, /.2. giones, quasfebi a majoribus fuis traditiu, pertinaciffime tueri ac^^^' defender e per fever ant ; nee confiderant quale s fint, fed ex hoc pro- bat oa atque veras effe confidunt, quod eas veteres tradiderunt ; tantaque eft aucloritas vetuftatis, ut inquirere in eam fcelus ejfe dicatur. The Englifli is, They accounted tradition infallible, and knew no other way whereby to find the truth of Religion but by its conveyance from their fore- fathers. How like here- in do thtyjpeak to thofe who contend for the corruptions crept into the Chriftian Church f who make ufe of the fame preten- ces for them, viz. that they were delivered down from the Fa- thers ; tantaque efi aucloritoA vetnfiatisfut inquirere in eam fcelus ■ ejfe dicatur ; who are we who will fee further than Antiquity f'* But it is no wonder if Antiquity be accompanied with dimnefs of: 2:f)4 Or/gwes Sacr^ : Book IL of fight y and fo it was undoubtedly as to the Vagan world ; and as to the Chriftian too, when fuch a mixture of Heathenifin carr/c into it. And the very fame arguments by which the pleaders for Chriftiamty did jufiifie the fr«f^ of their Religion, notwithftanding this ^rctQud^d antiquity, will with equal /^rr.? • hold for a reformation of fuch inveterate abufes, which under a pretence of Antiquity, have cr^;?^ into the Chriflian Church, ^mbrof, ep, t. Nullm pudor eft ad'meliora tranfire, faith Ambrofe in his anfwer Symmach. to Symmachm^ -what jhame is it to grow better ? ^uid fades ^ faith Laclantim , major efne potius an rationem fequeris /* 6"/ ra- De orig) error, ttonem wavis, difcedere te necejfe eft ab inftitutis & auBorltate I 2. c. 6. rnajorum : quoniam id folum return eft, quod ratio pr^fcribit. Sin autem pietas major es fequi fuadet : fateris igitur & ftultos illos ejl'e qui excogitatis contra rationem religionibus fervierlnt ; ' & te ineptum qui id colas quod falfum ejfe convicerts. Where reafon and mere authority oi fore- fathers ft and in competition, he is more a child than a man that knows not on which fide to" give his Jufrage. But with the grt^tc^i ftrength, and cleareft ^ c. genf. 1. 2. reafon Arnobius fpeaks in this cafe. Itaque cum nobis intendi- tis averfionem a religione priorum, caufam convenit ut infpiciatls^ non faBum, nee quid reliquerimus opponere, fed fecuti quid ft- mus potiffimum contufri. When you charge us, faith he, that we are revolted from the religion of our fore-fathers, you ought not prefently to condemn the faB, but to examine the reafons of it ; neither ought you fo much to look at what we have left, as what it is we have embraced. Nam ft mutare fententiam culpa eft ulla vel crimen, & a veteribus inftitutis in alioi res novas voluntatef- que migrare, criminatio ifta & vosfpeBat, qui toties vitam con- fuetudinemque mutaftis ; qui in mores alios, at que alios ritus pri- orum condemnatione tranfiftis. If mere departing from the Re- ligion of our Bnceftors be the great faulty all thofe who own themfelves to be Chriftians, were themfdves guilty of it when they revolted from Heathenifm. If it be here fa id that the cafe is different, becaufe there was fufficient reafon for it, which there is not as to the corruptions of the Chriftian Church -, if fo, then all the difpute is taken off from the jnatter offaif; or the revolt to the caufes inducing to it ; and if the Vroteftant be not able as to the caufes of our fe par at ion from Rome to ma- nifeft that they wxvc fufficient, let him then be triumphed over by the Romanift, and not before. I alTert then, and that with Chap. 9. The Truth of Scripture- Hiflory ajferted, apy with much affurance of mind, that the principles of the Re- formation ^VQ jufiifiable upon the fdme grounds of reafon^ which the embracing Chrifliariity was, when men of Heathens became Chriftians ; and that the arguments made Vik of by the Roma' nifts againft our feparation from them, are fuch as would have ju^ified a Pagan Fhilofopher in net embracing Chriftianitf,, For if it be unlawfull for any party of men^ to divide from o-' thers in a matter 0^ Religion which pretends antiquity and ?/?;/- verfality^ it had been unlaw full for a Tbilofopker to have de- fer ted Faganifm, as well as for a Vrotejiant to depart from J?(/W6'. For according to the principles of the Romanifisj the judgment in the r^«/^ of th^feparation^ and of the rr^r^ of i^^- //^/o;2 lies in that party from which we depart ; if we do now but apply this to the old Roman Senate or Emperors in the r^ye" of Chrijlian Religion and dividing from Heathen Worfhip^ we fl]al] quickly fee how eafie a matter it^will be to make Chrijri- anity it felf a Schifm, and the doclrine of C/;r//? th^ great eji he- ' rf//f. But z^ jlrong as thofe pretences were then, or have been //>re, the /'(?rr6'r of the d-.tirine of C/^r//^ hath been fo great ^ as to conquer them, .and thereby to manifefi^ that it was of (7(?^, when fuch potent prejudices were not able to withfiayid it. Of which Antiquity is the firft. • 2. T/;^ /^rj^^ ^«i univerfal fpread of Pagan Religion^ when Chriftianity came into the world j there was never ^o great Catholicifm, as in Heathen tvorjhip^ wYxn the Apoftles firft ap- peared in the Gentile world. Inde adeo per univerfa imperia^ Mimt. in OBa* provincias, oppida^ videmiis (ingulos facrorum ritus gentiles habere^ vio, />. 6. & Deos cokre nmnictpes^ faith C^cilius in Minutius Felix, The great charge againft the Chrijlians was Novellifm^ that they brought in a jtrange ^nd unheurd-of Religion. The common ^eftion was, where was your Religion before Jefus of Naza- reth ? as it hath been fince, nldere waiyoiir Religion before Lu- ther ? and the fame anfwer whic:i ferved then, will (land W2- movable now, there where no other Religion is, in the Word of God. For this was the weapon whereby the Prmitive Chrijli- ans defended themfelves againft the ajfaults cf Faganifm, and the evidences they brought that the doBrim preached by them, and contained in the Scriptures, was originally from God, were the only meayis (^i over -throwing Paganifm, notwith- ftanding its pretended univerfality, 3. Settle^ %^6 Origines Sacrte : Book II. 3. Settlement hy Laws of Heathen n'orjliip. This was fo much pretended and pleaded for, that as far as we can find, by the Hiflory of the Frimitive Churchy the pretence on which the Chriftians fufFered, was /edition, and oppofing the eftahlijked Laws, The Chrijfians were reckoned inter illicit as faBioneSy A^nl. f. 38. jjs appears by TertHllian, among tinlawfull Corporations ; the Foliticians and States-men were all for preferving the Z^rri ; they troubled not themfclves much about any Religion, but only that which was fettled by Laiv, they fought to uphold, becaufe the aiiing contrary to it might bring Ibrae difturbance to the civil State, There were feveral Laws which the Chri-- ftians were then brought under, and condemned for the breach of. I. The Law againji Hateria, or Conventicles, as they were pleafcd frequently to ftyle the meeting of Chriftians to- gether ; thence the places where the Chriftians afiembled for xvorflnp, were commonly called Conventicula ; Ita appellabant obfervat. in /^^^^ ^jj-}^ Heraldiis, ubi congregabantur Chriftiani craturi, 0- ^^^° • ' '^' verbi divini interpret at i one m accepturi, ac facras Synaxes habi- turi : but Elmenhorftius more (I'.ortly s Conventicula loca fiint Tibi chriftiani congregati orare confueveru^t. The places where the Chriftians did meet and pray together, were called Conventi- cles : in Eaftlica Sicinnini ubi ritm Chriftiani eft conventiculum, Hiflor. 1. 27. ^^ith Jmmianus Marcellinus; cur imm.amter xonventicula dirui^ j-irnoh. I. 4. faith Armbius -, qui univerjum populum cum ipfo pariter conven- Laciant. I. %. ticulo concremavit, as LaBantius likewife fpeaks. Now the rea- fon of the name w^as, becaufe the Heathens judged thefe ajfem- blies of Chriftians to be Illegal Societies, For which we are to underftand ; that in the time of the Roman Emperours, when they grew fufpicious of their own fafety, they feverely prohibi- ted all thofe Sodalitia, or Societies and Colledges, which were very much in ufe in the Roman Common- wealth, in imiitation of the i-m/elcu in the Cities of Greece, Thefe were fuch focie- ties of perlbns, which voluntarily confederated together either for fome particular defign, or for preferving Love and Friend- fhip among each other, and thence had their frequent meet- ings in common together. Now the more numerous thefe were, and the more clofely they confederated, the movQ jealous eye the Roman Emperours had upon them, becaufe of (bme clandeftine de/igns, which they fufpedled might be carried on for diftur- bance of the publick Veace in fuch fufpicious meetings. Thence came C. I I. Chap. 9. The Truth of Script ure-HiJlory ajjertcd. z^y came out many particular EdiBs of the Emperours againil all {uch kinds o( focieties. Now when the Chriftians began to be fomewhat numero^tSy and had according to the principles of their Religien frequent Ajftmblies for Divine worjhipy and did confederate together by fuch Symbols^ of being wajhed with water ^ and eating and drink- ing together ( which was all tht Heathens apprehended by their life oiBaptifm, and the Lord's Supper) the Pro-confuls and other Magtjlrates in their (everal Provinces bring the Chriftians un- der thefe Edicis^ and fo punirtied them for the breach of the Laws. Which as appears by Vliny his Epiftle to Trajan was Lib, 10, f^.97. the only account on which the wifer Heathens did proceed a- gainft the Chriftians 5 for we fee he troubled not himfelf much about the truth and e'vidence of Chriftian Religion, but flich perfons were brought before him, and after he had interroga- ted them w^hether they w^re Chriftians, or no, [everal times^ if they perjifted, he then puniftoed them not fo much for their Religion^ as for their obftinacy and contempt o^ authority. For lb much is implied in thofe words of his, iVry of Chri- ftians could not be reckoned inter illicitae fact iones \ for ^ faith he, hac coitio Chriftianorum merito fane illicit a fi illicitis par ; merito damnanda fi quis de ea queritur eo titnlo quo d'e fa^ioni- Q q bm 198 Origines Sacral : Book It , bus querela eft. In cujus perniciem aliquando convenimm f Hoc fumus congregati quod & diaper ft ; hoc univerfi quod & fmguli ; neminem Udentes , neminem contrift antes 5 quum probi^ quum honi coeunt^ quum pit, quum cafti congregantur^ non eft factio dicenda fed curia. If., faith he, the focieties of Chriftians were like others., there might he fome reafon to condemn them., under the head of factions : but as long cu> we meet together for no man's injury^ that whether divided, or ajfembled, we are ft ill the f-arne, that we grieve and injure no body ; when fuch a company of good men meet together^ it is rather a Council than a Fabtion. 2, Another Law the Chriftians were brought under, was, 'that againft Innovations in Religion ; thence it was laid lb much to the charge of the Chriftians, that they did ^^v 'ua- ^cfS'6fA4/ig, go contrary to the eftahlifhed Law ; as Porphyrie laid jfiid E>ftb 1.6. of Origen, becaufe he was a Chriftian, he did x^^^^^^^v }^ Ecclef. hifi.cap. c^^fof^i, and whcn he fpeaks of Ammonim revolting from , '^* Chriftianity to Vaganifm^^-^^i -^fo^ -mv 7(p voy-^a 'mhtletov (/^Ji/Salki-n, he turned to the way of life., which was agreeable to the efta- blifljed Laws, Now Chriftianity was every-where looked on as a great Innovation., infomuch that the Chriftians were ac- Tertid j^polc^. cufed to be legum^ morum, naturae inimici, as enemies to man- kind as well as the Laws., becaule they drew jnen off from that way of Religion which mankind had generally agreed in. Thence Apud Eufeb. zALmilianu6 the PrafeB of ^^P- ^^- (pva-iv Tfim^f ^Kct^^i 5 -^ f^^ (p\i7ivy to return to the com- mon fence of mankind., and to forget what was fo much again ft it, as he fuppofed Chriftianity to be. When Vaul preached at Athens, his firft accufation was, that he was a Treacher of ftrange Deities, becaufe he preached to them Jefus and the refur- \ Aft. 17. 18. region. And Demetrius 3.t Ephefus knew no fuch potent jr- gument againft Paul, as that his Religion deftroyed the worfliip \ 19- 27- from hence it was, Chriftianity by Vlinjy is called amentiayhy ^^'"^P ^^^ Tacitm exitiabilis juperftitioy by Suetonius Superfiitio nova &'jaa1',^n.l.i$. exitiabilis ; fo much did thefe three great men agree, in con- Sueton. in Ns- demning the beft Religion in the world for mndnefsy and new^ rone. and deteftable Superftition ; the ground of the great pique was,' the enmity declared by Chrifiians againft the Idolatrous Temples^ and worfl)ip of the Heathens. 4. The Law againft Treafon j for fometimes they proceeded fo high, as to accufs the Chriftians Ufdi Majefiatis^ and thence Tertuljp.c.iT. they are commonly called publici hoflesy enemies to all civil c.^s- Government. Which they inferfd from hence : i.Eecaufe they would not facrifice for the Emperoufs fafety ; Ideo commit- Apl. c. 29. timuSy laith Tertullian^ in Majeftatem Iniperatorum, quia illos non fubjicimus rebus fui6\ ^ia non ludimus de officio falut is eo- rum^ qui earn non putamus in manibus effie plumbatis. The ac- cufation for Treafon Jay in their refufing tofupplicate the Idols for the Emperoufs welfare. 2. Becaufe they would not fwear Jby the Emperoufs Genius, Thence Saturnius laid to the Mar- Herald, in Ter. tyr, Tantum jura per genium Cafaris nofiri, if he would but ^^^• fwear by the Genius of Cafar, he fhould be faved. Yet though "^^'^' '''^- '^• they refufed to fwear by the Empcrour's Genius, they did not refufe to teftifie their Allegiance ^ 2nd to fn;ear by the Empe- roufs fafety. Sed & juramMs., laith TertulUan., ficut non per ge- ^^d. c. 32. nios Cafarum, it a per falutem eorum qu^e efi augufiior omnibus geniis. ;. Becaufe they would not worfloip the Empcrcurs as Cods\ which was then grown a common cuftom. Non enim Beum Imperatorem dicam^ vel quia mentiri nefcio^ vel quia il- Cap. 33. lum deridere non audeo, vel quia nee ipfe fe Beum volet did jl homo fit, as the fame Authour fpeaks. Nay the Primitive Chriftians were very fcrupulous of calling the Emperour Do- minus ^ hoc enim Dei efi cognomen., becaufe the name Lord was 2n attribute of God's, and applied as his name to hi?n in Scrip- ture. The reafon of this Scrupulofity was not, from any y«f- fiion they made of the Sovereignty of Frinces^ or their cbliga- Qq 2 tion^ ^oo Origines Sacrce : Book II. tlon to obedience to them, (which they are very free in the acknowledgment of,) but from ^jealoufie and ]u?i fufpicion that fomething of Divine honour might be implied in it, when the adoration of Trinces was grown a cuftom. Therefore Tertul- Cap. 34. lian to prevent mif-underftandings, faith, Dicam plane Impera- torem Dominmn., fed more Communis fed quando non cogor ut Dominum Dei vice dicam. They refufed not the name in a common fence, but as it implied Divine honour. 4 Becaufe they would not obferve the publick feftivals of the Emperors in the way that others did, which it feems were ob- ■ ferved with abundance of loofenefs and debauchery by all forts c^p. 35. o{ perfons ; and as Tertullian fmartly fays, Malormn ynorum licentia pietcu> erit ; & occafto luxuria religio deputabitur ? De- bauchery is accounted a piece of loyalty^ and intemperance apart of religion. Which made the Chriflians rather hazard the repu- tation of their loyalty^ than bear a part in fo much rudenefs as was then ufed, and thence they abhorred all the folemn fped:a' Cap- 38. cies of the Romans ; Nihil efi mbk^ faith the fame Author, ditlu.^ vifu, auditUj cum infania Circi, cum impudicitta Theatric cum at roc it ate aren^., cum Xjjli vanitate. They had nothing to do either with the madnefs of the Cirque ., or the immodefty of the Theatre, or the cruelty of the Amphitheatre, or the vanity of the publick wrefllings. We lee then what a hard Province the Chriflians had, when fo many Laws were laid as bird-lime m their way to catch them, that it was impoffible for them to pro- fejs themfelves Chnfiians, and not run into a praemunire by their Laws, And therefore it cannot be conceived that many out of ajfeciation of novelty (liould then declare themfelves ChriftianSy when fb great hazards were run upon the profef- fing of it. Few foft-fpirited men, and lovers of their own eafe, but would have found hm^fine diflinciions and Jiice eva- fions to have reconciled themfelves to the publick Laws by fuch things which the Primitive Chriflians fo unanimoufly refufed, when tending to Frophanenefs or Idolatry. And from this dif- courfe we cannot but conclude with the Apoflle Paul, That the weapons whereby the Jpofiles and Primitive Chriflians encoun- ■X Ccr. 10. 4,5..?r^(i the Heathen world, were not flefhly or weak, but exceeding ftrong and power full, in that they obtained fo great a conquefi over the imaginations and carnal reafonwgs oi men (which were rh^iv firong holds they fecured themfelves in) as to make them readily Chap. 9. The Truth of Scripture- Hiflory ajferted, 301 readily to forfake their Heathen worfhip^ and become chearfull fervants to Chrifi, Thus we fee the power of the do^rine of Chrifi, which prevailed over the principles of education, though ^zzf)^r with pretended antiquity^ miverfality^ and efiablifurnent by c/V// Z^ii^j. But this will further appear if we confider that not only SeEl, iz. the matters of faith were contrary to the principles of f <^;rr j- 2. tion^ but becaufe many of them Teemed incredible to men's natural reafon ; that we cannot think perfons would be over- forward to believe fuch things. Every one being fo ready to take any advantage againft a Religion which did fo little flat- ter corrupt nature either as to its power or capacity \ inlbmuch that thofe who preached this DoArine^ declared openly to the world, that fuch perfons who would jadge of the Chriflian DoBrine, by fuch principles which mere natural reafon did pro- ceed upon (fuch one I fuppofe it is whom the Jpojlle calls "^vytYsn Iv^^cdT©', one that owned nothing but natural reafon^ i Cor. a. 14. whereby to judge of Divine Truths) could not entertain mat- ters oi faith ^ or o^ Divine revelation^ btCcLuCQ fuch things would feem hut folly to him that owned no higher principle than P/;/- iofophy, or that did not believe any Divine infpiration ; neither can fuch a one know them, becaufe a Divine revelation is the on- ly way to come to a thorough U7jderfianding of them : and a perfon who doth not believe fuch a Divine revelation, it is im- poflible he iliould be a competent judge of the truth of the DoBrine of Chrift, So that the only ground of receiving the Doclrine of the Gcj/?^/ is upon a Divine revelation, that G(?i himfelf by his Son and his Jpoftles, hath revealed thefe deep myfieries to the world, on which account it is we are Z'i?//;?^ to receive them, although they go beyond our reach and r^w- prehenfion. But we lee generally in the Heathen world how few of thofe did believe the Doctrine of Chrifi in comparifan, ' who were the great admirers of the Thilofophy, and tj^jj' of learning which was then cried up : the reafon was, becaufe Chrifiianity not only contained far deeper myfteries than any they were acquainted with, but delivered them in fuch a if^j' of authority, commanding them to believe the docirine they preached on the account of the Divine 'Authority of the r^- vealers of it. Such a way ofpropofal of doBrines to the world the Fhilofophy of the Crc'f'^ was unacquainted with, which on that II ' jGi Orjghtes Sacra : Book II. th^t accouiit they derided as not being fuited to the exa^ me- thod which their fciences proceeded in. No doubt had the Jpoftles come among tlie Greeks ^ ttoaam? Arei/^»v dvccm'^HKlov, that they were fuch Gal. de differ, do Brines which require faith and obedience^ without giving ^ulflib.i. c.^. lYien's reafon an account of the things commanded. As though the authority of a Legiflator fufliciently manifef^ed, were not enough to enforce a Z^i:r, unkls a fufBcient account were given of the //;/;2^ required to the purblind r6'j/r;« of every individual perfon a^fted by pajfwns and private interefts^ as to the /«/?/r^ and ^^///r;/ of it. And fo the primary obligation on man's part io faith and obedience^ mufi: arife not from the evidence o^ Di- vine Authority., but of the thing it felf which is revealed^ to the moll partial judgment of every c^^e* to whom it is propcfcd. Which thole who know how fliort tht flock of reafon is at the hefi in men, and how eafily that which f^, is fajhioned and moulded according to prejudices and interefts already entertain- ed, will look upon only as a defign to comply with the carnal defires of men, in that thereby none (liall be bound to go any further, than this blind and corrupted guide fliall lead them. Now tliefe being the terms on which the Gofpel of Chrifi^ muft have expected entertainment in the Gentile worldy how im- poffible had it been ever tp have found any fuccefs among men^ had there not been fufficient evidence given by a power of mi- racles^ that hovjQVQv flrange and incredible the doBrine might fcem, yet it was to be believed., becaufe there was fuffici- ent means to convince men that it was of Divine revela- tion. Neither ill! Chap. 9. The Truth of Scripture Htflory averted, J03 Neither were the matters oi faith only contrary to the in- ScB, ij. dinations of the world, but fo were th^ precepts of life or thofe things in Chriftianity which concerned praBice. There are two things which are the main fcope and ^f/%» of Chriftianity in reference to men's //V^/, and to take them off from their fins^ and from the world ; and of all things thefe are they which men's hearts are fo bewitched with. Now the precepts of the Gofpel are (uch which require the greateft purity of heart and ^^^- s S> i^> life^ which call upon men to deny themfelves^ and all nngodli- rp:^ ^ ^^ ^'^' «(/}, a fid worldly lufts, a>id to live fiber ly, and righteoujly^ ^^^'^ 2 Tim. 2. lo* godly in this prefent world \ that, all that name the name of Chrift 2 Cor. 7. i. ;?2?(^ depart from iniquity ; that, all true Chriftians muft be cleanfed from allfilthinefs pffle(h and fpirit, and muft perfek bo- linefs in the fear of God. And the Gojf^el enforceth thefe /r^- cepts of holinefs with the mod terrible denunciations of the wrath of God on thofe who difobey them ; that, the Lordjefui 2 Thef. i. 7,8; C/;r//? fl^all be revealed from Heaven with his mighty Angels in flaming fire ^ taking vengeance on them that know not God^ and that obey not the Gofpel of Jefus Chrift. That, the wrath of God Rom. i. 18. // revealed from Heaven againft all ungodlinefs and iinrighteoufi nefis ofi men^ who hold the truth in unrighteoufinefs. That, no iCor.(5. 9, 10. per fins who live in the habitual praciice of any known fin, fioall ^^^ 4- 20. inherit the Kingdom of God. That, no man fiwufd deceive them ^P"^^'.5^' J' ^• with. vain words ^ for becaufe of thefe things comes the wrath of God upon the children of difibedience ; that men do but vainly flatter themfelves when they feek to reconcile unholy lives with the hopes of future happinefs j for without holinefis, no manfi^all Heb. 12. 14. fee the Lord. And then in reference to the things of this pre- fient life which men bufie themfelves fo much about^ the Gofpel declares, that, they who love this worlds the love of the Father ^ J^^- ^' '^ is not in them ; that, the friendfioip of this world is enmity with God ; and whofoever will he a friend of the world is an enemy f^^ Janies 4. 4. God: That Chriftians muft net fit their afe^ions on Earthy but pL-j ^' '^^ ' on the things in Heaven ; That the converfation of true Chriftians jviat. 6. 20.' is in Haven. That, we ought not, to lay up our treafure on 2 Cor. 4. 18, Earthy but in Heaven ; That, we muft not look at the things which are fieen^ but at the things which are not feen ; for the ' ' things which are feen are temporal y but the things which are not feen are eternal. Now the whole defign of the dotlrine of Chrift '■being to perfuade men to lead a hcly and heavenly life while they are 3 ^4 Ortgines Sacr^ : Book II. are in this world, and thereby to be made meet: to be partakers Col. I. 12. of the inheritance with the Saints in lights can we think fo ma- ny men whofe hearts were wedded to //«, and the worlds could {ofuddenly be brought off from both without a divine power ac- companying that doUrine which was preached to them ? And Rom. I. 1 6. therefore the Jpofile faith, « i'^oA^jyciAstt to IvctyyiKm t5 xe^rQ', / am not ajhamed of the Gofpei of Chriji ; i. e. though the Gofpel of Chriji be the only true myfiery^ yet I do not by it as the Heathens are wont to do with their famous Eleufmian myjie- ries which were kept fo fecret by all the myfta and iTd^lcu-y but, faith he, I know no reafon I have to be ajhamed of any thing in the Gofpel^ that I fliould labour its concealment to ad- vance its veneration -, but the more publick the Gojpel is, the more it manifefts its power ; for through it God is plealed mightily to work, in order to the falvation both of Jew and Gentile. And of all the y^/rr^/} of the Gofpel^ that upon the ^^^rf/ and lives of men deferves the greateji confederation. The great ejjicacy and power of the G^j^^/ was abundantly feen in that great alteration which it WTought in all thofe who were the hearty imbracers of it. The Fhilofophers did very frequently and defervedly complain of the great inefficacy of all . ' their moral precepts upon the minds of men, and that by all ' thQiv injlr unions, politiora non meliora, ingenia fiunt, men im^ I proved more in knowledge th^u goodnefs ^ but novj Chriji ianity ^ not only enforced duties on ^;2f« with greater power and tf«r/;r^- ; /? ^ c •- ^^'^-^ * -^'^^ ^^-^^ Scriptures do, as Saint v^«/?/;2 fpeaks, Non tan- Jif Dei / 2 ^^^^^ ^-^ Fhilofophorum concertationibiis jlrepere, fed tanquam ex r. 19. ' oraculU & Dei nuhibm intonare, not make fome obftreperous clamours^ like thole tinkling Cymbals^ the Vhilofophers^ but awe the fouls of men with the majejiy of that God from whom they came. Neither was it only a great and empty found which was heard in tht preaching of the Gofpel ^ but when God thun- dred therein, he broke down the jlately Cedars^ and fhook the Pfal. 29. 5,8,9. mldernefsj and wj^^ r/;^ H/Wj ?^ Calve, (as it is faid of Thun- der^ called the w/V^ of the Lord in Scripture,) he humbled the I /?r/Wf of wf"/?, unfetled the Gentile world from its former /i?««- dations, and wrought great alterations on all thofe who hearken- ed to it. The whole ^^/^w of the 6'(?/^6'/ is couched in thole words which Saint Vaul tells us were fpoken to him by Chriji himfelf , when he appointed him to be an Jpojlle, to open men's I chap. 9. The Truth of ScrhtHre-IIiJlory ajferted. 3 o 5^ rnen^s eyeSy and to turn them fi-ofn darknefs to lights and jrom aOs i6, 18. the power of Satan unto God^ that they may receive forgivenefs vf fens, and inherit mice among them which were fan tti feed by faith in Chrlft. And the efficacy of this doBrine in order to thele great ends, was abundantly feen in the preaching of that Jpoftle, who was fo infirumental in converting the world to fiety and fobriety, as well as to the do5irine of Chrifi, What ftrange perfons were the Corinthians before they became Chri- flians [ for when the Jpoftle had enumerated many of the vileft perfons of the world, he prefently adds, Andfuch were fome i Cor.^.io,iic ■of you:, but ye are wafhed, hut ye are fan lifted, but ye are jufii- fied in the name of the Lord Jefm, and by the fpirit of our God. The more dangerom the diftemper is, the more malignant its nature \ the more inveterate its continuance, the greater the efficacy of the remedy which works a cure of it. The power of grace is the more feen in eonverfeon, the greater the fins have been before it. It is an eafie matter in comparifon to remove a difeafe at its firft on-fet, of what it is to cure it when it be- comes Chronical, The /?(?TP^r of the Gofpel wrought upon all forts and kinds of perfons to manifefi to the T??(?r/i there was no diflemper of men's fouls fo ^re^f , but there was a poffibility of a r^w^i)* for it ; and not only fo, but pregnant and vifible in- fiances were given of tht power and ^j^c^fjy of it. For they them- felves fhew of us, laith the Apofile, what manner of entring in i Thef. 1.51,1 tx, we had among you, and how ye turned to God from Idols, toferve the living and true God, and to wait for his Son from Heaven, whom he raifed from the dead, even Jefus, which delivered us from the wrath to come. Now that which manifefts the ex- ceeding gvQat power and excellency of the Gofpel, was, thai: it not only turned men from one way of worfhip to anocber , which is a matter of no great difficulty, but that it turned men together with that from their lufts and fenfuality, to a holy and unblameable life. For men being more in love with their fins, than with their opinions, it muft needs be a greater popper which draws men from the praB ice of habitual fins, than that which only makes them change their opinions, cr alter the rray of worfhip they were brought up in. This is xh^i which Ori- gen throughout his Books againft Celfus triumphs^ in as the mod fignal evidence of a Divine power in the Doclnne of ^rhri^y that it wrought fo great an alteration on ail that truly em- R r braced 3o6 Origines Sacral : '—.^^ Book 11. braced it, that of vitious^ debauched^ and difolute^ it made c. CelfumJ. 2. them temper atCy fiber ^md religious^ on 7r^BT«f dv^pcd^^^ ^^^itpn f''^^' A§i7wv l^iov. The Doctrine of Chrifl did convert the mofl wicked per fins who embraced it^ from all their debaucheries^ to a life moft fiiitable to nature and reafin^ and to the praUice of all vertues. Therefore certainly the Gofpel could not want that commendation am.ong all ingenuom Moralijls^ that it was the m.oft excellent inftrument in the world to reform the lives of men^ and to promote real goodnefs in it. When they could not but take notice of fb many perfins continually fo brought off from their follies and vain converfations, to a life^ ferions^ fiber ^ and unblameable \ nay and ibme of the Chriftians were of fo much integrity and goodnefs^ that their greateft enemies were forced to fay that their only fault was, that they were Chrijiians. Bonus vir Cajus SejuSy tantum quod Chrifiianus, A very good man^ only a Chrijlian. But one would think this fiiould have made them have a higher opinion of Chrifiianity, when it did fo fuddenly make fo many good men in the world. Efpecially when this power was fo manifeji on fuch perfins who were fuppofed uncapable of being reformed by Fhilofophy^ youngs illiterate, and mean-fpirited perfins ; therefore it may be ]uii\y fuppofed that it was not by the fr-rength of their own reafon that this alteration was wrought within them, but by that Divine power which was able to tame the mofl: unruly ; to inftruci the moft ignorant , to raifi up the moi^ fordid perfins to fuch a generous temper, as to /light the good things of this life, in comparifon with thofi to come. And fo remarkable was the difference of life then between thofi that were Chrifli- ans, and thofe who were not ( as there is ftill between true Or/ ctelfh. ^krifiians, and mere pretenders ) that On^ew dares Celfus to i>. 12V compare them in point of morality with any other Societies in the world. <«' ?^ "^ '^« Xefrw /uct^TttStTiTst/ c^ocKiKnm, Qvvi^irct^Q-' /SgA770;'a»K 6Acfc77»<) TnKKaV K^ilTlklf lUy-^V^V r^ Iv 7lh J\'lf^ii C/iC' KKnaicov \ For the Churches of God, which are difiipled to Cbrifl-* being compared with other Societies, fhine among them like lights in the world. For who can but confefs^ that even the worfer {art Chap. 9. The Truth of Scrtpture-Htflory ajJerteJ. 307 part of the Chrifiian Churches exceeds the befi of the popular Affemblies ? For^ as he goes on, the Church of God which is at Athens, that is ^s^CU th y susa^ifV, very quiet and peaceable, becaufe it feeks to approve it felf to God ; but the popular Jfem- bly at Athens that is ^o-/aitn(, feditious and quarrelfome^ and in nothing comparable to the Church of God there. So it is, if we compare the Churches of Corinth and Alexandria with the Af- femblies of the people there. So that any candid inquirer after truth will exceedingly wonder ( how fuch fair Jjlands (hould ap- pear nantes in gurgite vafio, in the midfl: of fuch a Sea of wickednefs as it was in thofe Cities) how thefe Churches of God jhould be planted in fuch rude andprophane places. So the fame Juthour goes on to compare the Church's Senate with that of the Cities^ the Church's Officers with theirs., and appeals to themfelves, that even thofe among them who were moil luke- warm in their offce^ did yet far exceed all the City-Magiflrates in all manner of vertues. From whence he rationally concludes, it 0 TnU^' »7ru< i^l, TTUi i)C iV^OyJV f^V VO^C^itV TTifi Ta 'IM(7K TB- If thefe things be fo, how can it but be mofl rational to adore the Divinity of Jefus^ who was able to accompUfh fuch great things ? And that not upon one or two, but upon fuch great multi- tudes as w^ere then converted to the Chrifiian faith. We read of one Vhadon, and one F()/f www brought from their debauche- ries by Socrates and Xenocrates^ but what are thefe compared with thofe who were turned from their fins to God by the Gofpel of Chriji ! kai /^^^(^ (J.tv TcTj^EAAwfl-zi', J? 77$ ^aiJ^ov tcai a;c On'g. l.i. p. were iu,vAia^ (piKoa^(pii-. <^vTi(, who owned any generous principles of Fhilofophy, and did not defpair of recovering vertue, as a thing feafible by humane j nature, and gives inflames ad hominem, to prove the pojfdniny J of the thing from the ancient Htroes, Hercules and Vlyfes^ from ] R r 2 ' the 308 Origines Sacra : Book TL the two Thildfophers, Socrates and Mufonm, and the two h-^ mous^xonverts to Philofiphy, Phadon affd -Polemon. But yet^ faith hQithefe are not fo much to be wondred at, that the elo- quence and reafoH of the Philofophers jhould prevail on fome very- few perfons, but that the mean and contemptible language of the Jpofiles Jhould convert fuch multitudes from intemperance to fo- hriety, from injufiice to fair-dealing, from cowardice to the high- €fi conftancy, yea fo great as to lay down their lives for the fake of vertue *, how can we but admire fo divine a power as was feen in it f And therefore, faith he, we conclude, ou tJ 3tiV ^6yca. ^^hiTTtv. That it is fo far from being impoffible, that it is not at all difficult for corrupt nature to be changed by the Word of God. LaEfantJefalf LaBantitu excellently manifefts that Philofophy could never do faf. l.^, c. 25. {0 much good in the world as Chrifiianity did, becaufe that was not fuited at all to common capacities, and did require fb much skill in the Arts to prepare mm for it, which it is impoffible all lliould be well skilled in, which yet are as capable of being happy^ as any others are. And how inefficaciom the precepts: of Philofophy were, appears by the Philofophers themfelves, who were far from having command by them over their Maflerlefs pajfions, and were fain fbmetimes to confefs that nature was too head-fhreng to be kept in by fuch weak reins as the pre- cepts of Philofophy were : But, faith he, what great command' divine precepts have upon the fouls of men, daily experience fhews, e^jf. 26. Da mihi virum qui fit iracundus, maledicm, effrenatm ; pauciffi-. mis Dei verbis, tarn placidum quam ovem reddam. Da cupidum^ avarum, tenacem -, jam tibi eum liber alem dabo, & pecuniam fuam plenis manibm largientem. Da timidum dolor is ac mortis ; jam erucesy & ignes, taurum contemnet. Da libidinofum^ adulter umy. ganeonem -, jamfobrium, caflum, continentem videbis. Da crude- km, & fanguinps appetentem ; jam in veram clementiam furor iUe mutabitur. Da injufium, inftpientem, peccatarem ; continuo & aqum, & prudens, Cr innocens erit. In which words that elegant writer doth by a Rhetorical Scheme fet out the remark- able alteration which was in any who became true ChrifiianSy that although they were paffionate, covetous, fearfull, luflfull^ cruel, unjufl, vitiom, yet upon their being Chriftians, they be- came mild, liberal, courageous, temperate, mercifull, jufi and un- hkmcabk ; which never any were brought to by mere Philofo- chap. 9. The Truth of Scripture- Htjlory ajferted. 509 fhy^ which rather teacheth the art of concealing vices ^ than of healing them. But now when Chrifii unity was fb efe^ual in the cure of thofe difiempers, which Thilofophy gave over as beyond its skill and /?^ir^r, when it cured them with lb great fuccefs, and that not in a Paracelftan way^ for them to r^/^;?/^ afterwards with greater violence , but it did 9d throughly un- fettle the fomes morbi, that it Ibould never gather to fo ^r^^r a /?^^i again j doth not this argue a /^^^w^^r more than Thilo/o- phicaly and that could be no lefs than Divine power which tended fo much to reform the worlds and to promote true goodnefs in it ? Thus we have confidcred the contrariety of the doctrine of 5e^. 24. C^r//? to mens natural inclinations^ and yet the {irangQ fuccefs it ^/2^ in the n?(?r/^, which in the h^ place wiJl appear yet more flrange^ when we add the almoft continual oppofition it met with from worldly power and policy. Had it been poffihle for a cun- ningly-devifed fable ^ or any mere contrivance ofimpoflers to have prevailed in the worlds when the moft pote?2t and /«W/e perfons bent their whole 7T?/Vi and deftgns for fupprejjing it ? What- ever it were in others, we are fhre of fome of the Roman Em- perours^ as Julian and Diocleftan^ that it was their mafier-defign to root out and jfo///^ Chr^ianity ; and was it only the fubtUty of the Chrifiians which made th^^t perfons give over their zr^r/^ in ^^j'/7j/> of accomplifhing it ? If the Chriftians were fuch/zi^- r/76' men, whence came all their enemies to agree in one com- mon calumny^ that they were a company ofpoor^weak^ ignorant^ inconfiderable men', and if they were fo, how came it to pa(s that by all their power and wifdom they could never extermi- nate thefe perfons '.i but as they c«f them ^(?jr«, they^r^TT up' the/j/fr, and multiplied by their fubfiraciion of them 1 There was fomething then certainly peculiar in Chrifiianttyy from all other doclrines^ that it not only was not advanced by any c/V/7 power ^ but it got ground by the oppofition it met i??/V/; in the. ]i;^r/i. And therefore it is an obfervable circumfiance^ that the firft Chrifiian Emperour (who aifled as Emperour for Chri- fiianity) viz. Canf^antine (for otherwife I know what may be (aid for Philippm) did not ^/?/?^jr in the world 'till Chrifli-^ anity had y/?rf^i itfclf over mo^ parts of the habitable world, God thereby letting us fee, that though the civil power ^ when become. Chrifiian^ might be vei7 ufefuU. for prote^ing Chri- fii anity ^. 3 1 o Origines Sacra : Book IT. jiianity^ yet that he flood in no need at all of it, as to the Propagation of it abroad in the world. But we fee it was quite otherwife in that Religion which had Mars its afcendant^ viz. Mahometifm ; For like Paracelfm his Damon^ it always fate upon the pummel of the [word, and made its way in the world merely by force and violence ; and as its firft conftitution had much of blood in it, fo by it hath it been fed and nourifhed ever fince. But it was quite otherwife with the Chrifiian Re- ligion-, it never thrived better than in the moft barren places, nor triumphed more, than when it fuffered moft; nor f pre ad it felf further than when it encountered the greatcft oppofition, Becaufe therein was fecn the great force and (ffcacy of the do^rine of Chrifi, that it ^cr^ w^ men's j'/^ir/V/ under the greateft miferies of ///^, and made them with chearfubiefs to undergo the moft exquifite torments which the cr^f/ry of Tjk- rjw/-/ could invent. The Stoicks and Epicureans boajls that their rp//^ man would be /;j/?/?jy in the Bull of Thalaris, were but fw/?/;7 and Thrafonical words, which none would venture the truth of by an experiment upon themfelves. It was the Chrifiian alone, and not the Epicurean , that could truly fay in the midft of torments. Suave eft & nihil euro, and might juftly alter a little of that common faying of the ChriftianSy and fay, Non magna loquimur,fed patimur, as well as vivimu6\ the thrift ians did not f^eak great things, but do andfuffer them. And this gained not only great reputation of integrity to them- felves, but much advanced the honour of their Religion in the world, when it was fb apparently y?f«, that no force or power was able to withftand it. Will not this at X^'Si^ perfuade you ^rmb I ^^^^ ^^^ Religion is m/f, and from Gc>J, faith Arnobiudf Sjiod gentef.' ' ' ' cum genera pcLTiarum tanta jint h vtbis propofita Religionis huju6 fequentibH6 leges, ougeatur res magis, & contra omnes mina^ at- que interdicia formidinum animofm populm ohnitatur, & ad cre- dendi ftudium^ prohibit ionis ipfim ftimulis excitetur ? ■ Itane iftud non divinum & facrum eft, aut fine Deo, eorum t ant as ani- morum fieri converfiones ut cum carnifices unci, aliique innumeri cruciatus, quemadmodum diximus, impendeant crediturts, veluti quadam dulcedine, at que omnium virtutum amore correpti , cog" \ nitoi accipiant rationes, atque mundi omnibus rebus pr^eponant \ amicitioi Chrifii ? That no fears, penalties, or torments, nrre a- lie to make a Chrifiian alter his profefiion^ but he would rather bid \\ chap. 9. The Truth of Scripture- Hiflory ajferted. 311 hid, adieu to his Life than to his Saviour, This Origen Jikewife Lih. i. c. Cel- frequently takes notice of, when Celfus had objected the novel- fum, p. 21. ty of Ctnftian-ty ; The more wonderfull it zs ( iaith Origen) that ^- ^^^^^"^ ^- ^• in fo port a time it Jhould fo largely fpread it f elf in the world ; ^' '^°' for if the cure of mens bodies he not wrought without Divine Trovidencey how much lefs the cure of fo many thoufands of fouls which have been converted at once to Humanity and Chrifiianityy efpecially when all the powers of the world were from the fir fi en- gaged to hinder the progrefs of this docirine, and yet notwith- flanding all this oppofition^ IvIk'aci, fjM yn^v/jai ytcoKui^t a>i Koy^ ^ 'TThCiOV 3 '^ /SatfCetfa c/iC^Tt]j^, y-Al fCiTi'ToltKJi yt.vej.cti o(7cti A^^'> ^ TYiv )iiir etvTov ^iO(7i(^HciM. The Word of God prevailed^ a^not being able to be ft opt by men^ and became Majler over all its ene~ miesy And not only fpread it felf quite through Greece , hut through a great part of the world befideSy and converted an in- numerable company of fouls to the true worfhip andfervice of God. Thus we have now manifefted from all the circumftances of the propagation of the doBrine of Chrifty what evidence there was of a Divine power accompanying of it, and how ufefull the firft miracles were in order to it. CHAP. 3 IX ' X)rigin€S Sacr^: Book II. CHAP. X. The difference of true Miracles from falle. The Mftreafonahlenefs of rejeBing the evidence from miracles, be- caufe of irnpofiures. That there are certain rules of diftin-- guifhingtrue miracles from falfe^ and divine from diabolical^ proved from God's intention in giving a power of miracles^ and the providence of God in the world. The inconvenience'of taking away the rational grounds of faith, and placing it on felf evidence. Of the felf -evidence of the Scriptures ^ and the infuffciency of that for refolving the quejiion about the autho- rity of the Scriptures. Of the pretended miracles of Impo^ors andfalfe Chrifis, 06 Barchochebas, David ^/-David and o- thers. The rules whereby to judge true miracles from falfe. I. True Divine miracles are wrought to confirm a Divine te^ jiimony. No miracles necejfary for the certain conveyance of a Divine tefiimony : proved from the evidences that the Scriptures could not be corrupted, 2. No miracles Divine which light and fire manifeft them^ felves, fo doth the doctrine of the Scripture to thofe who bcr lieve it *, It will be foon replied, th^t felf-evidence in a matter of faith can imply nothing but either z firm perfuafron of the mind concerning the thing propounded ; or elfe that there are fuch clear evidences in the thing it felf that none who freely life their reafon can deny it j the firft can be no argument to any other perfon any further than the authority of the perfon who declares it to have fuch felf evidence to him, doth extend it felf over the mind of the other; and to ones felf it leems a ftrange way of arguing, I believe the Scriptures becaufe they are true, and they are true becaufe I believe them ; for felf evidence implies fo much, if by it be meant the perfuafion of the mind^ that the thing is true ; but if by felf-evidence be further meant fuch clear evidence in the matter propounded, that all who do confider it, muft believe it. I then further enquire whether this evidence doth lie in the naked propofal of the things to the mderfianding ; and if fo, then every one, who ajfents to this propofttion, that the whole is greater than the part, muft like- wife a^ent to this, that the Scripture is the Word of God ; or whether doth the evidence lie, not in the naked propofal, but in the efficacy of the Spirit of God on the minds of thofe to whom it is propounded. Then, i. ThQ felf-evidence is taken off from the written Word which was the objeB, and removed to a quite diferent thing which is the efficient caufe, 2. Whe- ther then any perfens who want this efficacious operation of the Spirit of God, are or can be bound to believe the Scripture to be chap. 10. The Truth of Scripture- Htflory averted. 217 be God's Word? If they are bounds the duty muft be propom^ ded in fuch a way as may be fuffident to convince them that it is their duty ; but if all the evidence of the /-r^r/? of the Scripture lie on this teftimony of the ^'/^/V/V, then fuch as want this, can have none at all. But if, laftly, by this felf evidence be meant fuch an mprefs of God's authority on the Scriptures that any who coniider them as they ought, cannot but dif- cern ; I ftill further enquire, whether this imprefs lies in the ' pofitive ajfertions in Scripture that they are from God^ and that cannot be unlefs it be made appear to be impoffihle that any writing (bould pretend to be from God when it is not ; or elle in the written Books of Scripture, and then let it be made ap^ pear that any one merely by the evidence of the writings them- lelves without any further arguments can pronounce the Fro- verbs to be the mrd of God, and not the Book of mfdom 5 and Ecclefiaftes to be Divinely infpired, and not Ecclefiafticm : or elfe the felf-evidence mull: be in the excellency of the matters which are revealed in Scripture ; but this ftill falls very (hort. of refolving wholly the quefiion whether the Scripture be the Word of God ? for the utmoft that this can reach to is, that the things contained m Scripture are of fb high and excellent a nature, that we cannot conceive that any other (hould be the: cmthour of them but God himlelf ; all which being granted,. I am as far to feek as ever w\\2X grounds I have to believe that thole particular writings which we call the Scripture are the iVord of God, or that God did immediately imploy fuch and fuch ■ perfons to write fuch ^ndfuch books ; for I may believe the/^^- fiance of the dollrine to be of God, and yet not believe the books wherein it is contained, to be a divine and infallible tefli- mony -, as is evident in the many excellent devotional Books^ which are in the world. But yet further, if the only ground on which we are to be- lieve z dollrine Divine ht tht felf-evidencing light, znd power- of it, then I fuppofe there was the fame ground of believing a Divine Tefiimony when the dodlrine was declared without. writing, by the firfl: Preachers of it. So that by this method. of proceeding, the ground of believing Chrifi to be lent as the, Meffias fent from God, muft be wholly mid folely refolved into- this, that there was fo much felf evidence in this propofition . mtered by Chrifi^ I am the light of the Worlds that all the, Jewsy 5i8 Origines Sacr^e : Book II. '^ews had been bound to have believed him lent from God^ (for light manifefts itsfelf\) although owv Saviour had never done any one miracle^ to make it appear that he came from God, And we cannot but charge our Saviour on this account with being at a very unneceffary expence u'^on the world in doing ib many miracles^ when the bare naked affirmation that he was the Mejjm, had been fufficient to have convinced the whole world. But is it conceivable then upon wiiat account our Saviour (liould lay fo much force on the miracles done by him- felf in order to the proving his Teftimony to be Divine^ that Joh. 5. 35. he faith himfelf, that he had a greater witnefs than that ^/John, ( who yet doubtlels h^d felf- evidencing light going along with his Dotfrine too, ) for the works which the Father hath given me to finijhj the fame works that I do, bear witnefs of me that the Father hath fent me. Can any thing be more plain, or have gvQ^tQv fe If- evidence in it, than that our Saviour in thefe words doth lay the evidence' of his Divine Tefiimony upon the miracles which he wrought, which on that account he fo of- Joh.10.25:, 38. ten appeals to, on this very Reafon, becaufe they bear witnefs 14. 1 1. QJ^ ijiyyi . ^^^ ij^ fjjgy jpQi/j^ j2ot believe him on his own Teftimony^ ^^' ^'^' yet they ought to believe him for his work's fake ? Doth all this now amount only to a removing of prejudices from the Perfon of Chrift? which yet according to the teyiour of the objeBion we are confidering of, it is impofjible the power of miracles fliould do, if thefe miracles may be fo far done or counterfeited by falfe Chrifis, that we can have no certain evidence to difiin- guifh the one from the other, SeB- 3. Which the objection pretends j and was the great thing wherein Ctlfis the Epicurean triumphed fo much, that Chrifi Orig. lib. 1. c.fb>oM fore-tell that others fhould come and do miracles which they Ce'f. mufi not hearken to, and thence would inferr a^ fi^om Chriji's own confejjion that miracles have in them ^^v -d-iioy, nothing di^ vine but what may be done by wicked men : Tmi h « ^rxtov a.'Tn ■ ^' dvTwv £f3^y^ r (Av ^ioVy t«^ 3 jiMT^f «j4/e3w/ ; // jt not d wretched thing, faith he, that fi-om the fame works one fhould be accounted a God, and others Deceivers f Whereby thofc who would invalidate the Argument from miracles, may take no- tice how finely they fall in with one of the moft bitter enemies of Chrifi i an Religion, and make ufe of the fame arguments which he did j and therefore Origens reply to him, will reach them chap. lo. The Trut^ of Scripture- Hjjlory ajjerted, 319 them too. For^ faith he, our Saviour in thofe words of his doth not bid men beware in general of fuch as did miracles , AAA dfcTTO ra T^ti a.vA^§iv>i(nv ictvi^^ iij r y^ex^^v T6 'J'£», ;»9 'srwf^y- ^;i/- /^iij f /;f w ^^rr^rf lCctouvtS-/u^a^ T^^ tTizLyyzKKo/jSi^iii W SUvdfJ.iti 'd^iTai^HV^ flrlBly and fever ely to examine the pretenders to themy and that from the life and manners of thofe that do themy and from the efeBs and confequents of themy whether they do good or hurt in the worldy whether they correB men's manner Sy or bring men to goodnefs, holinefsy and truthy and on this account we are neither to chap. 10. The Truth of Scripture- Hijiory averted 311 to rejetl all miracles^, nor imbrace all pretence s^ but carefully and prudently examine the rational evidences whereby thofe which are true and divine^ may be known from fuch as are counterfeit and diabolical. And this now leads us to the main fubjeB of this Chapter, SeB, 4; ^ viz. What rules we have to proceed by, in judging miracles to be true ovfalfe ; which may be thefe following. True Divine Miracles are wrought in confirmation of fome j. Divine Teftimony. Becaufe we have manifefted by all the precedent difeourfe^ that the intention of miracles is to feat tomQ 'DivluQ Revelation. Thereforeif G(?^ (liould work w/>^- cles when no Divine Teftimony is to be confirmed, God would fet the broad Seal of Heaven to a blank. If it be faid no, be- caufe it will witnefs to m now the truth of that Teftimony which was delivered fo many ages fince. I anfwer, i. The truth of that Teftimony was fufficiently fealed a* the time of the delivery of it, and is conveyed down in a certain way to us. Is it not fufficient that the Charter of a Corporation had the Prince's broad Seal in the time of the giving of it, but that every fuc- cejjion of men in that Corporation muft have a new broad Seal^ or elfe they ought to queftion their Vatent f What ground » can there be for that^ when the original Seal and Fatent is prelerved , and is certainly conveyed down from age to age <* So I fay it is as to us, God's Grand Charter oi Grace and Mer^ cy to the world' through Jefm Chrift, was fealed by Divine miracles^ at the delivery of it to the world ■•, the original Pa- tent^ viz. the Scriptures wherein the Charter is contained, is ■conveyed in a moft certain manner to us ; to this Tatent the Seal is annexed^ and in it are contained thofe undoubted mira- cles which were wrought in confirmation of it, lb that a new fealing of this Patent is wholly needlefs , unlefs we had fome caufe of fufpicion, that the Original Fatent it felf vv^ere loft, or the fir ft fealing was not true. If the latter^ then Chriftian Religion is not true^ if the Miracles wrought for confirmation of it were falfe., becaufe the truth of it depends fb much on the Verity and Divinity of the Miracles which were then wrought. If thtfirft htfufpe^ed^ viz. the certain convey^ ance of the Patent^ viz, the Scriptures^ fome certain grounds of fuch a fufpicion muft be difcovered in a matter of fo great moment^ efpecially when the great and many Societies oi the T < Chriftian 32X Origines Sacrce : Book IL Chrifiidn World do all confent urianimoufly in the contrary. Nay it is impoiTible that any rat mat man can conceive that the Patent which we now rely upon, is fuppofititiofis or corrupted in any of thofe thi?7gs which are of concernment to the Lhri- flian fVorld ; and that on thefe ac count s. 1 . From the watchfulmfs of Divine Trovidchce for the good of mankind. Can we conceive that there is a Cod who rules and takes care of the xporld^ and who to manifeft his fignal Love to mankind^ (hould not only grant a latent of Mercy to^ the world., by his Son Chriji , and then fealed it by Divine Miracles., and in order to the certain conveyance of it to the world., caufed it by perfons im ployed by himfelf to be recorded in a language fitteft for its difperfing up and down the world., (all which I here fuppofe: ) Can we I fay conceive that this God fiiould fo far have caft off his care of the rvorld and the good of mankind^ which was the original ground of the Grant it felf, as to fuffer any wicked men or malignant fpirits to c-^r- r«/^ or alttr any of thofe Terms in it, on which men s eter- '■ ml falvation depends ; much lefs wholly to fiipprefs and defiroy it, and to fend forth one that is counterfeit and fnppofititiom inftead of it, and which fliould not be difsovered by the Chri- ftians of that age wherein that corrupt Copy was fet forth, nor by any of the mod lear?ied and i?7quifitive Chrijlians ever fince. They who can give any the lead entertainment to fb wild, ab- furd and irrational an imagination., are fo far from reafon^ that they are in good difpofition to Athe^fm •, and next to the /«- fpecting the Scriptures to be corrupted., they may rationally fiifpecl there is no fuch r/;;;?g; as a God and providence in the world ; or that the world is governed by a //?/>/> moft wj^- »^;?^ and enviom ofthtgood of mankind. Which is a fufpicion only becoming thofe Heathens ( among whom it was very fre- quent) who worlhipped the Devils inftead of Gud 2. Becaufe of the general difperfion of Copies in the world upon the firfi publijhing of them. We cannot otherwife con- ceive, but that records containing fo weighty and important things., would be tranfcribed by all thole Churches which be- lieved the truth of the things contained in tlfem. We fee how far curio fity will Cdrry men as to the care of tranfiribing ancient MSS. of old Authoitrs., which contain only fome /?k fi^ry^ of things paft that are of no great concernment to us : Cam chap. lo. The Truth of Scripture-H'tflory ajferted, 313 Can we then imagine thofe who ventured ejiates and lives upon the truth of the things revealed in Scripture^ would not he very careful! to preferve the authentick inftrurnent where- by they are revealed in a certain way to the whole world ? And be fides this, for a long time the originals themielves of the JpoftoUcal writings were preferved in the Church ♦, which makes TertuUian in his time appeal to them, y^g^ jam qui vo- De prafcnpt, les curiofitatem melius exercere in negctio falutis tua ; percurre ^^'^- ^-^^'^^^ Ecelefias ApofloUca^^ apud quas ipf^ adhuc cathedra Jpofivlorum ^^^ ^^' fuis locis prafidentur, apud quas ipfa authentic^ eorum liters recitantur^ fonantes vocem^ & reprafentantes faciem uniitfcujuf- que. Now how was \t poJfibleth.^t in that time the Scriptures could be corrupted^ when in fome of the Churches the original writings of the Jpoftles were preferved in a continual fiiccejfion ' of per Jhns from the Apoftles themfelves, and from thele origin mis Co many Copies w^ere tranfcribed, as were conveyed almoft -all the world over, through the large fpread of the Chriftian Churches at that time ? and therefore it is impoffible to co)?- ceive that a Copy (hould be corrupted in one Churchy when it would fo fpeedily be dilcovered by another ; efpecially confi- de ring thefe three c/ra^w/zw^rf/. I. The innumerable w?//r/- tude of Copies which would fpeedily l^e taken, both confidering the moment of the things and the eafinefs of doing it ; God^ probably for that very end, not loading the world with Pan- ders and Codes of his Lavps^ but contriving the whole in(lru' ments of mms fakiation in fo narrorpa compafs, that it might be eafily preferved and trar/fcribed by fuch who were paflSonate ddmirers of the Scriptures. 2. The great numbers of learned and inquifitive men who foon sprung up in the Chriflian Church i whofe great care was to explain and vindicate the facred Scriptures ; can we then think that all thefe Watch- men fliould be a\leep together when the evil one came to fow his Tares ^ which it is moft unreafonable to imagine^ when in the writings of all thefe learned men^ which were very many and voluminous^ fo much of the Scripture was infer t ed ^ that had there been corruption in the Copies themfelves, yet com- paring them With thofe writings , the corruptions would be foon iifcovered ? 3. The great veneration which all Chrijii- ans had of the Scripture, that they placed the /7C';7^j- of their eternal happinefs, upon the truth of the z/?/;?^/ contained in T t z the 5 14 Origines Sacne : Book 11. the Scriptures : Can we then think thefe would fufFer zxvf material alteration to creep into thefe records without their ohferving and difcovering it ? Can we now think when all per- fons are fo exceeding care full of their Deeds, and the Records whereon their ejlates depend, that the Chriftians who valued not this world in coinparifon of that to come^ fiiould fufFer the Magna Charta af that to be loft^ corrupted^ or imhezzelled a- way f Efpecially confidering Vvhat care and indujtry was ufed by many Primitive Chriflians to compare Copies together, as is evident in Vantanwiy who brought the Hebrew Copy of A^at- theiv out of the Indies to Alexandria, as Eufebim tells us: in Tamphilim and the Library he ere^ed at Cafarea, but efpeci- ally in Origens admirable Hexapla^ which were mainly inten- ded for this end. 3 . It is impoffible to conceive a corruption of the C(?/?^ of the Scriptures^ becaufe of the great differences which were all along the feveral ages of the Churchy between thofe who ac- knowledged the Scriptures to be Divine, So that if one party of them had foified in, or taken out any thing, -dnothtr party was ready to take notice of it> and would be fure to tell the world of it. And this might be one great reafon, why God m his viiCc providence might permit fuch an increafe of herefies in the Infancy of the Churchy viz. that thereby Chriflians might be. forced to fland upon thdr guard, and to have a fpecial ^jv^ to the Scriptures, which were always the great eye-fores of Hereticks. And from this great warimfs of the Church it was that fome of the Epifiles were fb long: abroad before they found general entertainment in all the Churches of Chrifi, be- caufe in tho(b Epifiles which were doubted for fome time, tlierc were fome paffages which leemed to favour fome of the /;e'r6'- yZ^-i then abroad ; but when upon fevere enquiry they are found to be what th^y pretendcdy they were received iaall the Chri- ftian Churches, ... // . 4. Becaufe of the agreement between the Old Teftament and - the New : the Prophecies of the Old Teftament appear with their full accompUflment in the New which we have ; fo that it is impoffible to think the New fhould ht corrupted unlefs the Old were too, which is moft unreafonable to imagine, when the Jews, who have been the great confervators of the Old Teftament^ have been all along the moft inveterate enemies of tlie: chap. io. The Truth of Scripture- Hijlery affertecC, 5x5 the Chrifiians : So that we cannot at all conceive it pofjihk that any material corruptions or alter atiotis ^vm\(\' creep into the Scriptures^ much lefs that the true Copy (hould be loft^ and a new one forged. SuppG#ng then that we have the fame authentick records Se^, 5,. preferved and handed down to us by the care of all Chrifiian Churches^ which were written in the firfi ages of the thurch ofChrift : what necejjity can we imagine that (7(?^ thould work new miracles to confirm that Doctrine which is conveyed down in a certain uninterrupted way to us , as being fealed by ;?2/V^- r/^i undoubtedly divine in the nv%. promulgation and penning of it ?^And this is the firft r^'^ytJW why the truth of the Scriptures ^eed not now ht fealed by ^^e'rr miracles, 1. Another, may be becaufe G't?^ in the Scripture hath appointed other ^/;/>i^j to continue in his Church to be as y^-j// to his people of the m^^/j of the things contained in Scriptures. Such are outwardly^ the Sacraments of the Gofpel, Baptifm^ and the Z(?ri'j" Supper, which are fet j/^^r/: to be as feals to confirm the ^r«/-/; of the Covenant on G'^^i'j /^^rr towards us in reference to the great promifes contained in it, in reference to pardon of fin, and the ground of our acceptance with G/> of 6W. It cannot then be with any reafon at all fuppofed, that when a Z)/- 'i//«i? Tejiimony is already confirmed by miracles undoubtedly Divine, that new miracle Ihould be wrought in the Church to afliire us of the fr?//-^ of it. So Chryfojlom fully expreifeth chryfofl. in himfelf concerning miracles, fpeaking of the firfi: ages of the i Cor. 2. ^ow,. Chrifi:ian Church : •^ ;^ ^ t57« x^^^f^^ lyiviTv, ;dj i/yj/ x§'^yi-^f » j^- ^. i'- 276. Tc.j, ,t/V '7ra,^i^{^^.. Miracles were very ufefull then, and not at all ufefull now \ for now we manifeji the truth of what we [peak from the facred Scriptures, and the miracles wrought in confir- mation of them. Which that excellent Authoiir there fully ma- nifejis in a difiourfe on this fubjeB, why miracles were mcejfary in the beginning of the Chrifiian Church, and are not now. To the fame purpofe St. Aufl:in fpeaks where he difcourfeth of the Devey. rsU^: truth ^^P' -5- 4; f' 5x6 Orrghes Sacral : Book II. truth of Religion Accepinim majores noftros vifihilia miracula fecHtoj ejfe ; per quos id atium eft ut mcejjaria von ejl'ent pofteris ; becaufe Xht wovldi believed by the miracles which were wrought at the firft preaching of the Gofpel^ therefore miracles are no longer mcejfary. For we cannot conceive how the woM fhould be at firft induced to believe without manifeft and uncontroukd miracles. For as Chryfoftom fpeal^s, ^ (nf/xe^^yv ;^eiV iTrciou.v.TttKx^ fxfi^ov TO ^v(Mt (pAipijou. It w/zs the greateft miracle of a 11^ if the world fhould believe without miracles. Which the Poet Dantes hath well expreiTed m the twenty- fourth Canto of Pa- radife. For when the Jpoftie is there brought in, asking the Poet upon what account he took the Scriptures of the Old and New Teftament to be the word of God j his anfwer is, I Probatio qua verum hoc mihi recludit^ Sunt opera^ quce fecuta funt^ ad qua Natura Hon candefecit ferrum unquam autpercujjtt incudem, i. e. the evidence of that is the Divine power of miracles which was in thofe who delivered thefe things to the world. And when the Jpoftie catechifeth him further, how he knew thofe miracles ^ were fuch cv> they pretend to be, viz. that they were true and divine \ his anfwer is, Si or bis terr^e fefe convert it ad Chriftianifmumy Jnquiebam ego^ fine miraculis : hoc unum Eft taky ut rcliqua non fmt ejm centefima pars, i. e. If the world fhould be converted^o the Chriftian faith with- out miracles, this would he fo great a miracle, that others were not to be compared with it, I conclude this then, with that t De civit. Dei kuown faying of St. Auftin ^ ^.fquis adhuc prodigia^ ut credaty /. 2 2. cap. 8. inquira, magnum eft ipfe prodigium qui mundo ere dent e mm cre- dit. He that fee ks for miracles ft ill to induce him to faith, when the world is converted to the Chriftian fnthy he needs vot feek I for prodigies abroad \ he wants only a Icoking-glafs to difcover one, ¥ov as he goes on , Vnde temPoribm erudiois & omne quod fieri non poteft refpuentibtiSy fine ulas mirarulis nimium mi- rabi liter incred'bilia credidit munlis f Whence came it to pafs that in fo learned and wary an age af> that wa^ which the Apoftles preached chap. lo. The Truth of Scripture Hijlory ajferted. ^ij preached in^ the world without miracles Jhould be brought to be- lieve things fo ftrangely incredible a^ thofe were which thrift and his Apoftles preached ? So that by this it appears that the in- tention of miracles was to confirm a Divine Teftimony to the world, ffnd ro make that appear credible which otherwife w^ould have feemed incredible ; but to what end now, when this Divine Teftimony is believed in the world^ fhould miracles || be continued among thofe who believe the Doctrine to be Di~ vins^ the miracles wrought for the confirmation of it to have been true^ and the Scriptures which contain both, to be the undoubted fFord of God ? To what purpcfe then the huge out- cry of miracles in the Roman Church is, is hard to conceive, un- • Jefs it be to make it appi^ar how ambitious that Church is of be- ing called by the name of him, whofe coming is after the work- ing of Satan, with all power, and figns, and lying wonders, W 2TheC2.9,io. with all deceivablenefs of nnrighteoufnefs in them that perijh, be- caufe they received not the love of the truth that they might be faved. For had they received the Love of the Truth of the Gofpel, they would have believed it on the account of thofe miracles and Jigns and wonders which were wrought for the confirmation of it, by Chrift and his Apoftles -, and not have- gone about by their juglings and impoftures infiead oi bringing me to believe the Gofpel, to make them queftion the truth of thtfirft miracles when they fee fo many counterfeits ; had we not great ajfurance the Apoftles were men of other defigns and interefts than Voinih Vriefts are, and that there is not now any fiich neceftity of miracles, as there was then when a Divi?ie Teftimony revealing the truth o^ Chrift ian Religion was confirmed by them. Tidofe miracles cannot be Divine, which are done now for the Se^. G, confirmation of any thing contrary to that Divine Teftimony, which 2. is confirmed by uncontrouled Divine Miracles, The cafe is not j the fame now, which was before the coming of Chift ;. for - ' then though the Law- of A^ofes was confirmed by miracles; yet though the do^rine of Chrift did null the obligation of that Law, the miracles of Chrift were to be looked on as Diviney becaufe God did not intend the Ceremonial Law to be perpe- t^ual ; and there were many Prophecies which could not have their accomplifioment but under a new ft ate : But now under the Gofpel, God hath declared this to be the laft revelation of his. i 3iS Grigtnes Sacral : Book H. his mind and nill to the world by his Sun^ that now the Tro- pbecies of the Old Teftament are accompHflied , and the Tro- fhecies of the New refped only the various conditions of the Chrijfian Churchy without any the leaft intimation of any fur- ther revelation of God s mind and will to the world : So that now the Scriptures are our adequate rule o^ faith ^ and that ac- cording to which we are to judge all pretenders to infpiration or miracles. And according to this rule we are to proceed in any thing which is propounded to us to believe by any per- fons, upon any pretences whatfoever. Under the Lan? after the eftablipoment of the Law its felf by the miracles of Afofes, the rw/^" of judging all pretenders to miracles y was by the worjhip Deut. 13. I, of the rrw^ G(?i. 7/" r/^^r^ arife among you a Vrophety or a* 2> 3- dreamer of dreams ^ and giveth thee a fign^ er a wonder ^ and the fign or the wonder come to pafs^ whereof he [pake to thee ^ faying^ Let m go after other Gods (which thoU haft not known) and let m ferve them : thou fialt mt hearken unto the words of that Vrc- phet, or that dreamer of dreams : for the Lord your God prove tb you to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your hearty and with &ll your foul. Whereby it is plain, that after . the true do&^rine is confirmed by Divine miracles ^ God may give the Devil or falfe Vrophets power to work^ if not real mi- \. racks y yQtfuch as men cannot ;W^^ by the things themfelves whether they be real or no ; and this God may do for the tryal of men's faith^ whether they will forfake the true doBrine confirmed by greater miracles for the fake of fuch dotfrines which are contrary thereto, and are confirmed by falfe Vrophets^ by figns and wonders. Now in this cafe our rule of tryal muft not be fo much the wonders confidered in themfelves whether real or m^ as the comparing them with the miracles which were wrought in confirmation of that do^rine^ which is contrary to 'thlsy which thefe wonders tend to the proving of. Therefore |. God'^ people under the Law w^ere to examine the fcope and drift of the miracles \ if they were intended to bring them to Idolatry^ what-ever they were, they were not to hearken to thofe who did them. So now under the Gofpel^ as the wor- fhip of the true God was then the ftandard whereby to judge of miracles by the Law of Mofes^ fo the worftnp of the true Cod through Jefm Chrift, and by the doctrine revealed by him, is the ftandard whereby we ought to judge of all pretenders to chap. 10. The Truth of Scripture- H'tjiory aJferteJ. 319 to work miracles. So that let the miracles be what they willy if they contradicl that doBrine which c hrift revealed tflt the world, we are to look upon them as only tryals of our faith in Chrifi, to fee whether we love him with our whole hearts or no. And therefore I think it needlefs to examine all the particulars of Lipftm his relations of miracles wrought by his Diva Virgo Hallenfts and AfprecoUis j for if I fee, that their intention and [cope is to let up the worfl?ip of Damons^ or a middle /(?r^ of Deities between God and m, which the iS^rr/p- r«r^ is ignorant of, on that very account I am ^^«»i to reject^ them all. Although I think it very poljible to find out the difference between true miracles, and them^ in the manner and circumftances of their operation ; but this, as it is of more curiofity, fo of k(s neceffity ; for if the doclrine of the .^cn/?- ri/r^j was confirmed by miracles infinitely above thefe. I an> ^^;^«^ to ji/;frf to that, and not to believe any other dociriney though an Angel from Heaven fhould preach it^ much lefs, al- though fbme Popifh Triefis may boaft much of miracles to confirm a doclrine oppojite to the Gofpel: which I know not how far God may in judgment g,ive thofe i/?;j^fi /^oK^^r to ' work, or others /^/V/; to believe, becaufe they would not re- ceive the truth in the love of it : and thefe arc now thofe Ties^a^ 4svAf, lying wonders which the Scripture fore-warns 2 Thefl 2. 9. us that we (hpuld not believe, viz. fuch as lead men to the belief oi lyes, or of doclrine s, contrary to that of the Gofpel oi Jefm Chrifi. tf/'here miracle's are true and divine, there the effecis which Secf, 7. follow them upon the minds of thofe who believe them ^ are true 3. md divine, i e. the effecl: of believing of them, is the draw- ing of men from fin unto Gcd, This the Primitive Chriftians infifted much upon, as an undoubted evidence that the mira- cles of Chrifi- were wrought by a Divine Power, becaufe the effeB which followed them, was the work of converfion of fouls from fii and Idols to God and thrifi, and all true piety and ver- tue. As the ejfeti of the miracles of Mofes was the drawing a people off from '^uperfiitwn and Idolatry to the worjhip of the true God'^ fb the effeti which followed the belief of \\\t mi- racles of Chrift in th^ world was the purging men's fouh from all fin and wicked/iefs to make them new creatures ^ and to hve in dXlexaUntfs and holinefs of converfation. And thereby Ori- \X u gen J JO ' Origines Sacra : Book II. Li^. a. <:. c^/f. gen difcovers the great difference between the miracles of Chrlfi and Jntichrift^ that the intent of all Aritichrift's won- ders was to bring men ^i dmrUjj '^ dJ^xAcKy to the deceivabknefs. of unrighteoufnefs whereby to defiroy them ; but the intent of the miracles of Chrift was « « Tdn aAA* a^iheAct '^v^Vy not the deceiving but the faving of fouls ^ 77^ }<> t K§€i7joi/it ^iov ^ to delight to run in the ways of God's Commandments. Now is it poffible that thefe fhould be the ejfe^is of any evil fpirit? But on the contrary we fee the effetis of all Impoftors, and pretended mi- racles wrought by Diabolical power was to bring men off from / • God to fin ^ and to dijfolve that ftridt obligation to duty which was laid upon men by the Gofpel of Chrijt. Thus it was in that early ape of the Apoflles , Simon Magus , who far out- went Apollonim Tyanem or any other Heathen in his pretended miracles^ according to the report which is given of him by F. Grot in ^hc Primitive Chriftians \ but we fee the intent of his mira- 1 Thel. 2. 9, ^1^^ ^^^^ ^^ ^^j^^ ^^^ admiration of himfelf and to bring men off from all holinefs of converfation, by afferting among other damnable herefies, that God did not at all regard what men didy but only what they believed: wherein the Gnojiicks were his/^/- lowers. Now when miracles are wrought to be Patrons offin^ we may eafily know from whom they come* Se^. 8. Thofe miracles are wrought by a Divine power which tend to 4. the overthrow of the Kingdom of Satan in the world. This is evident from hence, becaufe all fuch things as are out oimans power to eifcift, muft either be done by a power Divine or MUt.i2.i5,2(j. Diabolical: For as our Saviour argues, Every Kingdom divi- ded againft its felf is brought to defolation^ and every City oi^ Houfe divided again]} its felf cannot ji and ; and if Satan caft out Sat an ^ he is divided againfi himfelf how fh all then his Kingdom ft and ^ Now Chrift by his miracles did not only difpojfefs Satan Chap. I o. The Truth of Scripture Htfiory afferted, 351 Satm~wX. of men's bodies^ but out of his Temples too, as hath been (hewn already. And befides the BoBrine of Chr'tft which was confirmed by thofe miracles^ was in every thing diredlly contrary to the Devils dcfign^ in the World. For, i. The bevirs defign was to conceal h'mfelf among thofe who worjhip- ped him \ the defign of the Gofpel was to difcover him whom the Gentiles worfhipped, to be an evil and malignant fpirit, that defigned nothing but their ruine. Now it appears in the whole hifiory of Gentilifm^ the grand myfiery of State which the Devil uled among the Heathens w^s to make himfelf to be f/z/^^« and worjhipped for Gc)i, and to make them believe that their Demons were very ^i?o^ and benign fpirits ; which made the ?latonifi:s and other Fhilofophers Co much incenfed againft the Primitive Chrifiians, when they declared their Damons to be nothing elfe but infernal and wicked fpirits which fought the defiru^tion oi fouls » 1. The Devils great defign wm to draw men to the praBice of the greateft wickednefs under a pretence of Religion 5 as is very obfervabk in all the Heathen myfteries^ which the more recondite and hidden they were, the greater wickednefs lay at the bottom of them^ and lb were to purpofe myfteries of ini^ quity ; but now the defign of the Gofpel was to promote the greateft purity both of heart and life \ There being in no other Religion in the world either ilach incomparable Precepts of /?^- //»f/f, or fuch incour aging Promifes to the praBice of it (from eternal life hereafter as the reward, and the affijlance of Gf?i'i fpirit to /;f /p men here ) or fuch prevdiling motives to per- fuade men to it, from the love of God in Chrifi; to the Worlds the undertakings ofChrifi for m in his death and fuferifjgs, the excellent pattern we have to follow in our Saviour's own exam- ple ; now thefe things make it plain that the defign of Chrifi; and the Dm/ are diametrically oppofite to each other. 3 . The J^y/^» of the Devil is to let God and mankind at the greatefi diftance from each other-, th^ defign of Chrifi in the Gofpel is to bring them nearer together. The Devil lirft r^w/?/"/ to finy and then for 7?;? ; he makes men pre fume to fin., and to defpair becaufe they have finned, Chrift firft keeps men from fin, by his Precepts and Threatnings, and then fuppodng %, incoura- geth f/?^w to repent with /^^/'f/ 0^ pardon procured by -himfelf for all truly penitent and believing finners. Thus in every f^/??^ Uu 2 the &(. 33^ Origines Sacra : Book IT. the defign of Chrlft and the Devil are contrary, which makes it evident that the miracles wrought in confirmation? of the doBrine of thrift could be from no evilfpirit, and therefore mull be from a mf/y Divine t'ower, ^eB, 9. 7r/<^ dw^ Divine Miracles may be known and diftinguijhed 5, from falfe and diabolical, from the circum^ances^ or the manner of their operation. There were fome \)ZQu[\2iV fgnatures on the miracles of Chrift which are not to be found in any wrought 'trmh. £. genfes by H power Icls than Divine. Which Arnohim well expref- Ar.;>,?g-.2 5,2(5, feth in thefe words to thQ Heathens, Poteftis ali quern nobis defgnare^ monftrare ex omnibm illis h^agi6 qui unquam fuere^ per fecula^ confimile aliquid Chrifto willeftma ex parte qui fece- rit f qui fine idla vi carniinum^ fine herbarum aut grami?2um fuccis, fine ulla aliqua- obfervatione follicita facrorum^ libaminum, temporumf Atqui conftitit Chriftum fine ulfis admini- culis rerur/ij fine ullim ritm obfervatione y vel lege ^ omnia ilia qua fecit y nominis fui pojfibilitate fecife, & quod proprium, con- fentaneum^ Deo dignum finer at vero^ nihil nocens aut noxium, fed opiferumj fed fialutare^ fed auxiliaribm plenum bonis pote^ fiatis munificcc liberalitate donafe f He challengeth the Hea-- thens to produce any one of all their Magicians who did the thoufdndth/?jr^ of what our Saviour did: who made ufie of none of their Magical rites and obfervations in what-ever he did J and what-ever he did was merely by his own power, and was withall raoft becoming God ; and moil: beneficial to the world. And thence he proceeds to anfvver the Heathens a- bout the miracles wrought by their Gods, which fell fioort of thofe oiChrift in three main particulars, the manner of their working^ and the number of them, and the quality of the things done. 1. The mamier of their working ; What they did was with a great deal oi pomp and ceremony, what Chrifi did was with a word fpeaking , and (bmetimes without it by the touch of his garment : Non inquiro, non exlgo , faith he , quis Deus, aut quo tempore, cui fiuerit auxiliatus, aut quern fraclum reftituerit fanitati j illud fiolum audire defidero, an fine ullius adjunBione materia, i. e. medicaminis alicujus ad taBum morbos jufferit ab hominibus evolare, imperaverit, fecerit, e^ emori valetudinum canfiamy & debilium corpora ad fiuas re me are naturas. Omitting aU other circHmfiances^ name me^ faith he, but which of your Gods Chap. lo. The Truth of Scripture- Hifiory ajferted. 33 j Gods ever cured, a difiafe without any adjoyned matter, fame prefcriptions or other ; or which of them ever commanded dif eafes out of bodies by their mere touchy and quite removed the caufe of the dijhmpers, tAifcuIapius, he fays, cured difeafes y but in the way that ordinary ' hyftcians do, by prefribing fome- things or other, to be done by the patients. Nulla autem vir- tus ejl medicaminibus amovere qUce 72oceant ; beneficia ifia rerum^ non funt curantium potejiates. To cure difeafts by prefcriptions argues no power at all in the prefer iber^ but vertue in the medr^ cine, 2. In the number of the perfons cured .- they were very few which were cured in the Heathen Temples ; Chrifi cured whole multitudes, and that not in tht revefiries of the Temples where fiaud and impcflure might be eafily fufpefled, but in the pre- fence of the people w^ho brought to him all manner of per^ fins fick of all forts of difeafes, which were cured by him ; and thefe fo numerous, that the Evzngelifi who records many of Chrifi's miracles which had been omitted by the others, yet tells us at laft,, the miracles of Chrifi were fo many, that the whole world would not contain them. But now Arnohius tells Joh. ii. if. . the Heathens, ^id prodeji ojimdere umm aut alter um fortaffe curatos, cum tot millibus fubvenerit nemo, & plena fint omnia miferorum infeliciumque dehbra ? tvhat matter is it to fhew one or two cured, when thoufands lie continually in the Temples pe- rifhing for want of cure ? yea fuch as did S BOOK III. tBV C H A P. L Of the Being of God. 7^6 Principles of all Religion lie in the Being of God and Im- mortality of the foul : from them the neceffity of a f articu- lar divine revelation ratiinally deduced \ the method laid down for proving the divine Authority of the Scriptures, Why Moles doth not prove the Being of God, but fuppofe it. The motion of a Deity very confonant to reafon^ Of the nature of Idea's, and particularly of the Idea of God. How we can form an Idea of an infinite Being* How farfuch an Idea ar^ gues exifience. The great unreafonahlenefs of Atheifm de^ monfirated» Of the Hypothefes of the Arifiotelian and Epi- curean Atheifis. The Atheifis pretences examined and refu- ted. Of the nature of the arguments whereby we prove there is a God. Of univerfal confent and the evidence of that to prove a Deity and Immortality of fouls. Of neceffity of ex- tfience implied in the notion of God j and how far that proves the Being of God, The order of the world and ufefulnefs of the parts of it , and efpeciaUy of mans body an argument of a Deity. Some higher principle proved to he in the world than matter and motion. The Nature of the foul, and poffibility of its fubfifting after death. Strange appearances in Nature not folvablehy the power of imagination. HAving in the precedent Book largely given a rational ^^^ j account of the grounds of om faith, as to the perfons whom God imploys to reveal his mmd to the world ; if we can now make it appear that xhokfacred records which X X we ^j& Origines Sacral : Book III. we embrace as divimly infpired^ contain in them nothing un- 'worthy of fo great a nawe , or unbecoming perjons ient from - God to deliver; there will be nothing wanting to juftifie our . Religion in point of reafon to be true^ and of revelation to be divine. For the Scriptures themfelves coming to us in the name of GeA^ we are bound to believe them to be fuch as they pretend to be , unlels we have ground to quefiion the general foundations of all religion as uncertain ^ or this particular way - of religion as not fuitable to tho(e general foundations. The foundations of all religion lie in /9z^6 things ; f^^? ^i>^re ^ ^ G'(?<^ who rules the world, and that th^ fouls of men are capable of Jrleb. II. o. fubfifiing after death; for he that comes unto God^ mufi believe that he zs^ and thdt he is a rewarder of them that feek him ; fb thatif thefe things be not fuppofed asmoft agreeable to humane reafon^ we cannot imagine upon what grounds mankind fliould embrace any way of religion at all. For if there be not a God whom I am to ferve and obej^ and if I have not ?iJoul of an im- mortal nature, there can be no fufficient obligation to religion^ nor motive inducing to it-: For all obligation to obedience muft fuppofe the exifience of fuch a Being which hath power to com- mandmt ; and by reafon of the promifcuous fcatterings Osgood and evil in this life, the motives engaging men to the praBice of religion, muft fuppofe the certainty of a future fate. If thefe f^/«^i h^fure, and thQ foundations of religion in general thereby firmly efablijhedy it will prefently follow as a matter moft agree- able to reafon, that the G^J whom we are to ferve fliould him- felf prefer ibe the way of his own worflnp ; and if the right of donation of that happinefs which mens /o«/i are capable of^be alone in himfelf, that he alone fliould declare the terms on which it may be expeBed ; For man being a creature endued with a free principle of aBing, which he is confcious to him- felf of, and therefore not being carried to his end by necejfity of nature or external violence^ without the concurrence of his own reafondndi choice^ we muft flippofe this happinefs to depend upon the performance of fomc conditions on man's part, whereby he may demonftrate that it is the matter of his free choice , and that he freely quits all other interefts that he might obtain the enjoyment of it. Which conditions to be performed, being ex~ freffions of man's obedience towards God as his Creator and Go- vernour^ and of his gratitude for the tenders of ib great a hap- pinefs c-^ /i#» chap. I. The truth of Scripture-Hiflory ajjferte^, ^ i^ fimfs which is the free gift of his Maker ^ we cannot fuppo(c any one to have power to frefcrtbe thefe condttionsy but he that hath fo-wer likewife to deprive the fcul of her happmefs upon nonperformance^ and that muft be God himfelf But in order to man's underfanding his duty^ and his obligation to obedience^ it is neceffary that thefe conditions muft not be locked up in the Cabinet Council of Heaven^ but muft be lb far declared and re- sealed y that he may be fully acquainted with thofererwi which his happinefs depends upon j elfe his negleB of them would be excufable^ and his mi fery unavoidable. Had man indeed remain- ed without offending his Maker, he might ftill have ftood in his favour upon the general terms of obedience due from the crea- ture to his Creator , and to all fuch particular precepts which fliould bear the imprefs of his Maker's will upon them, befide which, the whole volume of the Creation^ without, and his own reafon within would have been fufficient direBors to him in the performance of his duty. But he abufing his liberty , and being thereby guilty of ^pofiajie from God (as is evident by a cootinued propenfity to fin, and the ftrangene(s between God and xht fouls of men) a particular revelation is now become we- cejjary^ that mankind may thereby underftand on what terms God will be pleafed again, and by what means they may be re- ftoredinto his favour. And lafily, it not agreeing with the free and communicative nature of divine goodnefs ( which was the firft original of the world's Creation ) to fuffer all mankind to perifli in their ovvn folly, we muft fuppofe this way for man's recovery to be fomewhere prefcribed, and the revelation of it to be fomewhere extant in the world. So that from the general principles of the exiftence of God, and immortality of the /o«/, we have deduced by clear and evident reafon the necejjity of ibme particular divme revelation ^ as thQ fi and ard and meafure of Religion. And according to thefe principles we muft exa- mine whatever pretends to be of ^^'u/??^ revelation ; for it muft Idq fuitable to that ^^x'/jy^ w^r/^re from whom it is fuppofed to come, and it muft be agreeable to the conditions of the fculs of men, and therefore that which carries with it the greatelt evi- dence of divine revelation^ is, a faithful! reprefentraion of the fiate of the cafe between God and the fouls of men, and a-^;- uine dtfcovtry of thofe ways whereby men's fouls may be fit- ted for eternal \ happmefs. A diviKe revelation then muft be X X 2 faithfull 340 Origines Sacra: Book III. faithfuH and true in all its narrations ; it muft be excellent and becoming God in all its difco/, which they fb fblemnly wor- fliipped, who had been before as Euhemerus plainly told them, poor mortal men, and thofe not of the bed reputation neither .- and therefore as the Epicurean in Tully well fays, omnis eorum ^^ ^^^- '^^<""' cultus eJJ'et in luBu, the moft {uitdblc devotion for them had * '' ^^^' ^^' been lamenting their death. Now when thefe common Deities were fo much derided by intelligent men, and yet the order of the world feemed to tell them there was really a God, though thofe were none ; thole who had Philofophical witSy fuch as Democritus and Eficurus let themfelves to work to fee if they could Jolvc the Vhanomena of nature without a Detty ; and therefore aflerted the origin of the univerfe to be only by a fortuitous concourfe of infinite little particles ; but herein they befooled themfelves and their greedy followers, who were glad to be rid of thole anxieties of mind which the thoughts of a Deity and an immortal foul did caufe within them. And al- though Lucretius in a bravado tells us of his Mafter,that when mens minds were funk under the burden of Relsgiony Humana ante oculcsfoede cum vita jaceret ^ In terris oppreja gravt fub religione : 25^ rerum Nat. Vrlmum Graius homo mortales t oiler e contra lib, i . Efl oculos aufus, prlmufque obflfiere contra. That Epicurus was the fir II true Gyant who durft encounter the. Godsy and if we believe him, overthrew them m open field ',^ I ^are religio pedibus fubjeBa vlcljfim Obterttur^ nos exaquat v IB or la coelo. Yet Cotta in TuUy reports the ijfue of this battle quite other- wife ; for although the greateft triumph in this vidlory had been only tobecome like the be^ifis that pen^i ; yet if we be^ lieve. 34^ Origines Sacra : Book III. lieve Cotta, Eflcurm was fo far from gaining any of his he- loved eafe and pkafure by his fenttments^ that never was School- hoy more afraid of a Rod^ nor did any enemy more dread a Concjuerory than Epcurus did the thoughts of a GoJ and ^^^//?>. Z)^ Mrf. JD^o^. JV^^ cjuenquam 'uidi qui magis ea qu^r, confidering it merely as an atl of the w/w^. For the mind is as really imployed about the o?7e as the other ; as the wll is about an o/'/V^ whether it be fea- fible or no. i. The 7J^^ may be confidered in regard of its objettiTje reality , or as it reprefents fbme outward objcH: ; now the truth ovfalflmd of the Idea lies in the underftanding pafling judgment concerning the outward objeB, as exiftenr^ which doth correfpond to the Idea which is in the mind. And the pronenef of the underfiandmgs Qvwv in this cafe arifeth from the di^Qrent nature of thok things which are reprefen- ted to the mmd y for fome of them are general and abft railed things Chap. r. The Truth of Scripture- Htftory ajfertect, 345* things, and do not at all fuppofe e;c//?ewc^, ?lIX\\^ nature of truth ^ of a Bdng^ of cogitation \ other I^^^'j depend upon exifience fuppofed, as the Idea of the 5«w, which I apprehend in my mind becaufe I have feen it ; but befides thefe, there are other Ideas in the mind^ which the underftandmg forms within its felf by its own power y as it is a principle of cogita- tion 'y fuch are thofe which are called entia rationisy and have no other exifience at all but only in the underfiandingy as Chi- mara^Sy Centauresy &c. Now as to thefe, we are to obferve, that although the compojition of thefe things together by the underfiandingy be that which makes thefe Idea's to be only fichtiousyyQt the under/landing would not be able to compound fuch things, w^ere they not feverally reprefented to the mind ; as unlefs we had known what a horfe and a man had been, our minds could not have conjoyned them together in its ap- prehenlion. So that in thefe which are the moft ficlitious Idea'Yy we fee, that although the Idea its felf be a mere crea- ture of the underftanding, yet the mind could not form fuch an Idea but upon pra-exifient matter, and fome ohjecli've rea- lity muft be fuppoled in order to the intelleSlual conception of thefe Anomalous entities. By which we lee that that ftrange kind of ommpotency which fome have attributed to the under- fiandingy lies not in a Power of conceiving things wholly im- pofiihUy or fanlying Ideas of abfolute mn-entities , but in a kind of African Copulation of fuch f^ecies of things toge- ther, which in Nature feem wholly incompojjibley (as the Schools ' fpeak) or have no congruity at all in the order of tliQ Umverfe. So that had there never been any fuch things in the World as matter and motiony it is very hard to conceive, how the un^ derfiandmg could have formed within its felf the 'variety of tht Jpecies of fuch things, which are the refults of thofe two grand principles of the Univerfe. Bat becaufe it hfbimpo/Jlhle for minds not very contemplative and Metaphyjical to ahfiraB from mattery thence it is we are apt to imagine{\ich a Power in the unckr^landmgy whereby it may form Ideas of fuch things which have no objcBive reality at all. T grant thole we call entia ration fs have no external reality as they e cannot be com- prehended, yet we may clearly and difttn^tly apprehend a Being to be of that Nature^ that no Umlts can be aftigned to it, as to its Tower or Prefence ; which is as much as to underftand it to be infinite. The ratio for malts of infinity may not be un- derftood clearly and diftindly, but yettl^ Being which is in- finite may be. Infinity its felf cannot be on this account, be- caufe however pcjitive we apprehend it, yet we always appre- hend it md. negative ii'/j/jbecaule we conceive it hy denying d[\ Itmitatiom and hounds to it ; but the Being which is infinite we apprehend in a fofitive manner ^^Ithough not ade^^uately ybQcaufQ we cannot comprehend all which is in it. As we may clearly and diftindlly fee the Sea^ though we cannot difcover the hounds of it ; fo may we clearly and diftindly apprehend (bme VerfieBions of G(?^when we/x our minds on them, although we are not able to grajfi them altogether in our narrow and confined in- telletfs^ becaufe they are Infinite, Thus we fee that God's In- finity doth not at all abate the cleamefs and difiinBnefs of the notion which we have of God \ fo that though the Ferfe^i- ons of God are without hounds or limits^ yet it bears no repug- nancy at all to mens natural faculties^ to have a fetled Idea of a Being Infinitely per fie B in their minds. Se^. 6, Jo the Mluefiion 1 anfwer, It feems highly prohahle and far more confonant to r^^/^w than the contrary , that this Idea of G(?i upon the mi7id of man, is no merely fiBitiof/s Idea, but that it is really imprinted there by that God whole Idea it is, and therefore dorh fuppofe a rfi^/;// in the thing correfpondent to that ohjeSlive reality which is in the un- derftanding. For although I am not fo well fatisfied that the mere ohjeclive reality of the Idea of God doth exceed the efficiency of the mind, as that Idea is nakedly confi- dered in its felf, becaufe of the unlimited power of the underftanding in conception : Yet 1 iay, confidering that Idea in all the circumftances of it, it feems highly prohahle that it is no m-ere ens rationis^ or figment of the under fi an- ding ; and that will appear on thelc coniiderations. i. This Idea is of fuch a Nature as could not be formed from the under fi an d'pig^s confidcratio?y of any corporeal phantafms. Becaufe Chap. I. the Truth of Scripture- Hijiory ajferted. j^p, Becaufe whatever hath any thing of matter in it, involves of necejfity many imferfetUons along with it ; for every part of matter is di'vtjible into more farts. Now it is a thing evi- dent to natural light , that it is a greater perfe5lion not to be divifible than to be fo. Befides, corporeal phantafms are fo far from helping us in forming this I^lea^ that they alone hinder us from a di(Hn5l conception of it, while we attend to them; becaufe thefe bear no proportion at all to fuch a being. So that this Idea however muft be a pure.j^ of mtelle^ion^ and there- fore fuppofing there were no othtr faculty in man but imagi- nation^ it would bear the greateft repugnancy to our conceftionsy and it would be according to the principles of Epicurus and ibme modern Vhdofophers^ a thing wholly imp^JJibk to form an- Idea of God^ unlefs with Epicurm we imagine him to be corpo- real^ which is to fay, he is no God. Which was the realbn that TuUy faid, Epicurus did only, nomine ponere, re toUere Deos^ be- caufe fuch a notion of God is repugnant to natural light. So that if this Idea doth wholly abftrad from corporeal phantafms ; it thereby appears that there is a higher faculty in man's foul than mere imagination., and it is hardly conceivable whence a faculty which thus extends it felf to an infinite objeSl^ (hould come,' but from an infinite Being : efpecially if we confider, Se- condly, That the under fl andmg in forming this Idea of God.^ doth not by diltind abhy firft colled one perfe^lioh^ and then another, and at laft unite thefe together, but the fimplicity and unity of all thefe per feB ions is as neceffarily conceived as any of them. Granting then that the underftanding by the obferving of feveral perfeclions in the world , might be able to abfira^t thefe feverally from each Being wherein they were, yet whence fljould the Idea of the unity and infepar ability of all thefe per^ fettions come ? The mind may, it is true, knit fome things to- gether mfiBitiotts Idea's., but then thole are lb far from unity with each other, that in themfelves they fpeak mutual rejpug- 'nancy to one another, which makes them proper entia ratioms ; but thefe feveral perfeclions are fo far from fpeaking repugnan- cy to each other, that the unity and mfepar ability of them is as necefiary to the forming of this Idea , as any other perfeBion whatfoever. So that from hence it appears that the confidera- tion of the perfeclions which are in the Creatures^ is only an occafxon given to the mind to help it in its Idea of Gody and not 3 JO Origines Sacra : Book III. not that the Idea it felf depends upon thole perfetTions as the caufes of it J as in the cleareil ivUthematical truths the man- ner of demon frratwn may be neceflary to help the underftand- ing to its clearer ajj'ent, though the things in themfelves be un- doubtedly trne. For all minds are not equally capable of the fame truths ; fome are of quicker apprehenfan than others are j now although to flower apprehenfions a more particular way of demonft rating things be neceflary , yet the truths in them- felves are equals though they have not equal evidence to feveral perfons. 3. It appears that this is no mere fiBitiom Idea from the uniformity of it in all perfons who have freed themfelves from the entanglements of corporeal phantafms. Thole we call en^ tia rationis, we find by experience in our minds^ that they are formed ad placttum ; we may imagine them as many ways as we pleale ; but we lee it is quite otherwife in this Idea of God\ Ibr in thofe attributes or perfeBions which by the light of Na- ture we attribute to God , there is an uniform conjent in all thole who have di^uefted their minds of corporeal phantafms in their conceptions of Go!/. For while men have agreed that the cbjeB of their Idea is a being ahfolutely perfe^, there hath been no dijfem in the perfeBions which have been attributed to it \ none have quefiioned but infinite wifdom,goodnefs, and power ^ joyned with^nece/fity of exifence, have been all implyed in this Idea. So that it is fcarce poflible to inftance in any one Idea, no not of thofe things which are moft obvious to our fenfes, wherein th^re hath been fo great an umformity of mens conce- ptions as in this Id^ of God, And the moft grols corporeal Idea of the moft fenfible matter hath been more liable to heats and difputes among Philofophers^ than this Idea of a Being infinite and ^uvdy Jj?ir it uaL Which ftrongly proves my prefent /^ri?- pofition^ that this Idea of God is very conjonant to natural light ; for it is hardly conceivable that there (hould be ^0 uni'uerjal a confcnt of minds in this Idea, were it not a natural rcfult from' the free ufe of our reafon and faculties. And that which adds further weight to this argument is, that although Infinity be fo neceftarily implyed in this Idea of God, yet men do not at- tribute all kind of infinite things to God; for there being con- ceivable infinite number , infinite longitude , as well as infinite power and knowledge , our minds readily attribute the latter to Chap. I. the truth of Scripture- Hlftory aJferteJ, 3 ^t to God , and as readily ahjtraB th,e other from his nature \ which is an argument this Idea is not fitliticus^ but argues reality in the thing correjpondent to our conception of it. So mucli may fuffice to clear the firft propofition, 'uiz,. That the notion of a God is 'uery Juitahle to the faculties of mens fouls , and to that light of nature "ivhich they proceed by in forming the conceptions of things. Thofe "who deny that there is a God, do ajjert other things on ^^^^ m^ far left evidence of reafon^ and muf by their own principles de- "Prop, 2. ny jome things which are apparently true. One would expe(^ that fuch perfons who are apt to condemn the whole world of folly in believing the truth of Religion, and would fain be ad- mired as men of a deeper reach, and greater -wit and fagacity than others, would, when they have exploded d. Deity, at lead give us fome more rational and conliftent account of things, than we can give that there is a God. But on the contrary wc find the reafons on which they rejett^ Deity fo Xdrntntdbly Tveak, and fo eafily retorted u'^ori thcmfelvcs, and the hypothefes they fubftitute inftead of a Deity fo precarious, obfcure znd uncertain^ that we need no other argument to evince the reafonablenefs 0^ Religion , than from the manifeft/o^j' as well as impiety oi thofe who oppofe \t. Which we (hall make evident by thefe two things : i . That while they deny a Deity, thej. aJJert other things on far lefs reafon, 2. That by thofe principles on which they deny a Deity , they mup deny fome things which are appa- rently true, / ■ 1 . 27?^^ they ajfert fome -things on far lefs reafon than we do that there is a God, For if there be not an infnitly power full God who produced the world out of nothing , it muft necefla- rily follow according to the different principles of the Arifiote- lian and Epicurean Atheifts, that either the world was as it is from all eternity, or elfe that it was.a,t firft made by the fortu- itotps concourfe of Atoms, -Now 1 appeal to the reafon of any ferfon, who hath the free ufeoi\i. Whether either ofthele two hypothefes urged with the fame or greater difficulties, &c, be not far more weakly proved than ^texiftence of a Deity is, or the production of the world by him. I. They run themfelves inPo the-^fame difficulties which they would avoid in thei'^/i^/of a Deity \ and nothing can be a great- er evidence of an /»^^w^W mifldthun this is : To deny a thing becaufe: 35*2. Orighes Sacrce : Book III^ becaufe of fome di^culty in it , and inftead of it to alTert ano- ther thing which is chargeable with the very fame difficulty in a higher degree. Thus when they rejed a Deitj, becaufe they cannot underftand what infinity means ; both thefe hyfothefes are liable to the fame intricacy in apprehenJing the nature of fomething infinite. For. according to the jE/>/c«r^««/, there muft be an infinite Jp ace y and what greater eale to the mind is there in conceiving an Idea of that than of an Infinite Being f And if the world be eternal ^ there muft have been paft an infi- nite fuccejfion of ages , and is not the underfiandmg as eafi- ly loft in this , as in an eternal Being which created the world ? For if the courje o{ generations in the world had no beginning at all , (which neceflarily follows upon the eternity of the world ) then an infinite number of fuccejfion s are alrea- dy f^/, and \ipafty then at an end^ and fo we find an infinite which hath had an end^ which is a co?ifecjuence becoming one who avoids the belief of a Deity , becaule Infinity is an uncon- ceivable thing. Beiides, if the number of generations hath been infinite ; thele two confecjuences will unavoidably follow , which the reafon of any one but an Atheifi would ftartle at, that one Infinite may be greater than another^ and that the part is ccjual to the whole. For let him ^^ where he pleafe, in the ccurfe of generations^ I demand whether in the Great grand- father s time thQ fuccefiion of generations "WZS finite or infinite ; if finite y then it had a beginning ; and lb the world not eternal;^ if infinite y then I ask, whether there were not a longer fucceffi- en of generations in the time of his Great-grand children^ and lb there muft be a number greater than that which was infinite \ for the former fucccffion was infinite, and this hath mor^ gene- rations in it than that had ; but if it be faid that they were . ecfualy becaufe both infinite yth^n thQ fuccejfion of generations to the Grand-father^ being but a part of that which extends to his Grand-children and pofierity, the part is e^ual to the whole. And is not now the notion of an Infinite Being enough to ftum- _ ble an Jtheift's reafon, when it can fo nimbly leap over fo ap- parent contradictions ? I infift n-ot on this as an evident dc- mvnfiration to provea D^zV/, which poffibly it may not amount to, becaufe it may only demon fir ate the iwp^yfiibility of cur tm- de^fiandmgs comprehendtn<^ the nature of Infinity. But how- ever it doth moft cvidcntlyi/kmonfirate the felly ^nd unreajon- ablenejs Chap. I . The Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted. 3 f | ahknefs of the Atheifi who rejeds the Being of God on the account of his Infinity^ when his underftanding is more /(?//f ia apprehending an infinite fuccejfion oi generations which follows from his [up fo fit ion of the eternity of the world. If then it be impofiihle^ as it is, upon any principles whatfoever, to avoid the conception of fomewhat infinite and eternal , either matter or Jpacey or Ibme Beings let any one appeal to his own reafon^ whether it be not more agreeable to that, to attribute thele per- feSlions to fuch a Beings to whofe Idea they neceflarily belongs than to attribute them to this worlds in whole conception they are not at all implied ; but on the contrary they do far more puzzle ouv under flandings than when we conceive them to be in God. If fomewhat muft have a continued duration^ and be of an unbounded nature^ how much more rational is it to conceive -^ifdom^ power ^ and goodnefs to be conjoined with eternity and infinity^ than to bellow thefe attributes upon an empty ^^re, or upon dull and unaftive matter ? It cannot be reafon then , but fome more bafe and unworthy principle which makes the Atheifi queftion the Being of God^ becaufe his perfe5lions are unconceivable^ when according to his own principles the moft puz.'dtng attributes of God return upon him with more jorcQ and violence^ and that in a more inexplicable manner. As the Atheifi muft admit thofe things himfelf which he re- Se^, 8« jedls the Being of God for ; fo he admits them upon far weak- 2. er grounds than we do attribute them to G(?^. If any thing may be made evident to man's natural reafon concerning the exifience of a Being fo infinite as God is , we doubt not but to make it appear that we have great afiurance of the Being of God^ but how far muft the Atheifi gOy how heartily muft he beg before his bypothefu either of the fortuitous concourfe of atoms ^ov eternity of the world will be granted to him i For if we ftay till he proves either o^ thefe by evident and demon* ftrative reajons^ the u'or/J may have an end before he proves his atoms could give it a begiiming^ and we may find it etemaly a parte poftr^ before he can prove it was fo a parte ante. For the-proof of a &eity we appeal to his o\sin faculties ^reafomwdi conjcience ; we make ufe of arguments before his ^'^j ; we bring the umverfal fenfe of mankind along with US : But for his principles^ wc muft wholly alter the prefent/^^e of the worlds and crumble the whole Univerfe into /i/fi?^ particles ; we ir.uft Z Z ^r/wi 3 5 4 . Origines Sacra! : Book 117. ^grind the Sun to powder^ and by a new way o? interment turn the (?<7r^/j into dufl and ajhes^ before we can lb much as imagine how the w;f?r/J could be franied. And when we have thus far begged leave to imagine things to be what they never ivere^ we muft then ftand by in fome tnfmite Jpace to behold the frif kings and dancings about of thefe Y\Vi\Q far tides of matter, till by their frequent rencounters ^ndjufi lings ontu^n aiiother, they at laft //w;^ themfelves together , and run fo long in a round till they make whirlpools enough for Sun^ Moon and Stars ^ and all the bodies of the Univerfe tO emerge out of; But what was it which at firft fet thefe little particles of mat- ter in motion ? W hence came fo great variety in them to pro-- duce fuch w on der full diver fa ies m bodies as there are in the world ? How came thefe cafual motions to hit fo luckily into fuch admirable contrivances as are in the Univerfe? When once I fee a thoufand blind men run the point of a fword in at a kcy-hcle without o»^ miffing; when I find them ?M frisking together in ^Jpaciom fields and exaftly meeting all at lall in the very middle of it ; when 1 once find, as TuUy fpeaks, the Annals of E?iniifs fairly written m^- heap of /and ^ and as Kepler's wife told him , ^ room full of herbs moying up~ and down fall down into the exadt order of falletSyl may then think the Atomical hjpothefis probable , and not before. But what evidence ofreafon or demonftration have we that the great bo- dies of the world did rejult from fuch a motion of thefe fmall f articles ? It is poffible to be fo, faith Epicurus ; what if we grant it pojftble ? can no things in the world be , which it is fojfible might have been otherwife ? What elle thinks Epicu- rus of the generations of things now ? they are fuch certainly as the world now is, and yet he believes it was once otherwife : Mufl therefore a bare pojfihility of the contrary make us deny our reafon, filence ccnfcience, contraditl the univerfal fenfe of man- kind by excluding a Df/V/ out of the world ? But whence doth it appear pc{fible ? Did we ever find any thing of the fame na- ture with the world produced in fuch a manner by fuch a con- ccurfe of atoms r Or is it becaufc we f^nd inf^iatural beings , how much thele particles of matter fcrvc to folve the Vhamme- na of nature ? But doth if at all follow, becaule now under Di- vine providence which wifely orders the world, and things in it, that "dxtf^ particles^ wtth their feveral affe^ions^wd motion^ may- give chap. I . The Divine Authority of the Scriptures afferted. 3 f 5 give us a tolerable account of many appearances as to bodies ^ tiiat therefore the Um^^erfe had its ^original merely by a con- cretion of theje , without any divine hand to order and ^/>^f// therefore^ queftion it? what if Epicurzfs hath proved his atomic al hypothefis by fome fiWyfophifms^ will the Atheifi therefore rather believe the creation of the world than it ? What if the Atheifi may make himfdf /pi?r; at fome fiories of apparitions infifted on to prove! chap. I. The Divhe Authority of the Scriptures ajferted, ^jj prove a Delty^ doth it therefore follow there is no God^ be- caule fome perfons have been over-credulous ? What if fome having more z^cal than kaowled^e^ rhay attribute fuch thingi to Gols immediate' h and ^ which may be produced by natural caufes^ doth it thence follow that God hath no hand in ^ot/er- */>^ the world at allf What \( fean^ and ^c/?^/ and perf-wa- fiofis^ may depend much on principles of education^ muft co;^- /cie?/ce then be refolved wholly into thefe ? What if Ibme de- vout Melancholifl may imbrace the iiTues of his own imagina^ tion for the imprejjions of the Divine Spirit^ doth it therefore* follow, that religion is nothing but firength of fancy impro- ved by principles of education "i What if fome of the »//e to obedience by luiting L^t^i;/ to the general inter eft of men, that therefore the Magifirates firft made them love themfelves and their own concerns ? So it is in religion, the Magifirate may make «/e of this propenftty to r^- ■^ ligion in men for ci-u// ends, but his making «/f of it doth fup- fofe it and not inftill it. For were Religion nothing el(e in the world but a dejign only of Toliticians, it would be /wp^?/. yFi'/f to keep that de^gn from being dif covered at one time or other, and when once it came to be kmwn^ it would hurry the whole world mto confufion , 2iVvdi t\it people would make no fcruple of all oaths and obligations, but every one would leek to do others what mifchief he could if he h?^ opportunity^ and chey no further than fear zndi force conftrained him. There- fore no principle can be fo dangerous to ?iftate as Atheijw, nor any thing more promote its peace than true Religion ; and the more men are perfwaded of the /r«/^ of Religion, they will be the bettery»%'e^//» and the more «/?/«/ in civil focieties. As well then may znAthieft lay there is no fuch thing Osgood nature in the world, becaufe that is apt to be abufed, nor any fuch thing as love, becaufe that may be cheated, as that Religion is no- thing but a defign, becaufe men may make it ftalk to their pri- vate ends. Thus we fee how the Atheifl by the force of thofe principles on which he denies a God, muft be forced to deny other things^ which yet by his own confejjion are apparently true. So chap. I . The Divine Authority of the Scriptures aJferteJ, 3' 5:9 So I come to the third ?rofcfition^vi\{iQh. is, That we have Seti, lo* as certain evidence that there is aGod^ as Tve can have^conjide- fvop, y ring his nature. When We demand the proof of a thing^oMX firit eje mull be to the nature of the thing which we defire may be proved ; For things equally true^ are not capable of e(\ual §vidence^ nor have like manners of frohation. There is no demonflration in Eucltde will ferve to prove that thereare fuch flaces as the hdies : we cannot prove the earth Ground by the judgment O^fenfe ; nor that thQfoul is immortal by corporeal fhantafms. Every diftindl kind of Being hath its peculiar ?z^^/ of frohation ; and therefore it ought not to be at all won- dred at, if the Supream and infinite Being have his peculiar way of demonfirating himfelf to the minds of wen If then wc have as evident />r6>«/, will (till float above the water^ and never be loft in the fwifteft cur- rent of Time, Thus we aflert this miverfal confent of mankindy as to the exiftence of a Deity ^ to be a thing fo con(bnant to our Natural reafon^ that as long as there are men in the World it will continue. But now it is hardly conceivable, according to the Vrinci- Sec}. 1 1- ples of Epicurus^ how mankind (hould univerfally agree in fome common [entiments ; much lefs how it fhould have fuch an an- * ticipation as hunfelf grants of the Being of God, For if the foul be nothing elfe but fome more aBive and vigorous parti- cles of matter (as Diogenes Laertim tells us, that his opinion Li^. 10. /« v. was that tht foul was nothing elfe but a Syfiem g? dro/ui^v Km- ^pcv.Gajfend, TtL-mv i^<^^oyyvKQTv.Tzav, of the mofi fmoofh and round atoms) [(i^o-'^-^'^P^^'Z' fo, it is very hard apprehending how any fuch things as antici- pations or common Notions can be lodged in the foul 5 For if our fouls be nothing el(e but fome fmall fpharical corpufcles which move up and down the body, as tihe Epicurean Philo- fophy fuppofeth, then all our knowledge and perception muft depend on motion^ which motion muft be by the imprejjion of external obje5fs : which Lucretius acknowledgeth and con- tends for. Invenks primis ^ fenfthm ejfe creatam Notitiam veri. Lib. ^. If then our knowledge of truth comes in by out fenfes^ and fenfation doth wholly depend upon the imprejfion of outward objecls, what becomes of all common Notions and of the Fro- lepfis of a Deity ? unlets we fuppofe the knowledge of a Deity came in by fenfe^ which Epicurus himfelf denies when he at- tributes to the Deity not corpus, but quafi corpus, as Tully tells j^^ ^^^ ^^^^ us, and therefore he is not a proper objeB of fenfe. So that ub^ i. it is impollible there [hould be any fuch thing as a natural No- tion which may be the ground of univ erf il confent among fiien, according to the Docirine oi Epicurus. And therefore it iiands to all reafon in the world, that if our fenfes be the only com- A a a petent ^6z Origines Sacra* : Book HI. petcnt Judges o{ truth, men (hould differ about nothing more than fuch things which cannot be tryed by the judgment of fenfe ; Such as the notion of a God is ; (for where (hould men be more uncertain in their judgments,than in fuch things which they have no rule at all to go by in the judging of ?J but we are fo far from finding it fo that men are nothing fo much agreed about th^ objech oi fenfe^ as they are about thtexi" ftence of a Deity ; and therefore we fee this univerfal ccnfent of mankind concerning a God^ cannot be faived by the prin- ciples of thofe who deny it ; according to which no account at all can be given of any fuch things as univerfal ov common notions. SeU, II. Neither can this univerfal confent of mankind be enervated with any greater probability by thofe Atheifts who affert the eternity of theTPor/^,and refolve this confent wholly into mere tradition^ fuch as the Fables of Poets were conveyed in from one to another. For I demand concerning this tradition^ Whether ever it had any beginning or no ? If it had no beginnings it could be no tradition ; for that muft run up to fome perfons from whom it firft came ; again, if it had no beginnings it w^as neceffary that it fhould always be, on the fame accounts on which th^y make the World eternal. And if it be neceffary ^ it muft be antecedent to any free aB of mans will which tra- dition fuppofeth \ and ^o iome falfe opinion would be found to be as neceffary as the World's being eternal, (and by confequence the World's being eternal may be a neceffary falfe opinionj but if any falfe opinion be once granted neceffary ^ it then follows thztouv faculties are not true, and tint nature is a neceffary caule of fome notorious falfity, which is the higheft impeach- ment the Jtheifi could have laid upon his only adored Nature ; which muft then have done that, (which Ariflotle wasaOiamed to think ever nature fliould be guilty of) which is fimething in vain ; for to \vh2t purpofe fliould man have rational faculties^ if he be under an unavoidable neceffity of being deceived ? If then it be granted that this tradition had once a beginning, ei- ther it began with humane Nature, ov humane Nature did exifti long before it ; if it began with mankind, then mankind had a beginning, and fb the ivorld was not eternal 5 if mankind did exifi before this tradition, I then enquire in what time, and by what means, came this tradition firfl to be embraced, i»f it doth not fuppofe the exifience of a Deity ? Can any age chap. I . The Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted, 36^ be mentioned in hijtory^ wherein this tradition was not uni- verfally received ? and which is moft to our purpofe, the fur- ther we go back in hijiory^ the fuller the world was of Deities , if we believe the Heathen Hiftories ; but however no age can be inftanced in, wherein this tradition began firft to be believed in the World ; we can trace the Foetick Fables to their true original^ by the teftimonies of thofe who believed them ; we know the particular Authors of them, and what courfe they took in divulging of them ; we find great diverfities among themfelves in the meaning of them, and many nations th^t never heard of them. But all things are quite otherwile in this tradition ; we have none to fix on as the firfi Au^ thors of it ; if the world were eternal^ and the belief of ^ Deity fabulous, we cannot underftand by what artifice a fabulous tradition could come to be fo univerfelly received in the world, that no Nation of old could be inftanced in by the inquifetive Thilofophers^ but however rude and barbarous it was, yet it owned a Deity, How could fuch a tradition be fprcad io far, but either by force or fraud ? it could not be hy force ^ becaufe embraced by an unanimous confent where no force at all hath been ufed, and hath been fo rooted in the very Na- tures%f thok people who have been moft tender of their //- berties^ that they have refented no indignity fo highly , as any affronts they conceived to be offered to their Gods. Nay, and where any perfons would feem to quit the belief of a Deity ^ we find what force and violence they have ufed to their own reafon and Confcience to bring themfelves to Atheifm , which they could not fubdue their minds to any longer than the will could command the underftanding^ which v/hen it gained but a little liberty to examine it felf , or view the worlds or w^as alarmed with thunder^ earth -quakes or violent ficknefsy did bring back again the fenfe of a Deity with greater force and power than they had endeavoured to (liake it off with. Now had this tradition come by force into the world, there would have been a fecret exultation of mind to h^ freed from it, as we fee Nature rejoyceth to fhake, off every thing which is violent^ and to fettle every thing accord- ing to its due order. It is only fraud then which can be with any reafon Imagined in this cafe ; and how unreafona- ble it is to imagine it here, will appear to any one who doth A a a 2 confider ??» 3(^4 Origines Sacra : Book III. confider how extremely jealous the 7i;orId is of being impo- Jed upon by the fubtilty of fuch who are thought to be the greateft VoUtkians. For the very opinion of their fub- tilty makes them apt to fufped a defign in every thing they ffeak or do^ fo that nothing doth more generally hinder the entertaining of any motion fo much among vulgar people^ as that it comes from a ferfon reputed very politick. So that the moft politick way of gaining upon the apprehenjions of the vulgar^ is by taking upon one the greateft appearance of /implicity ^nd integrity ; and this now could not be done by fuch Politicians which we now fpeak of, but by accommoda- ting themfelves to fuch things in the people which were fo confonant to their Natures ^ that they could fufpe>5l no deftgn at all in the matters propounded to them. And thus I af- fert it to have been in the prefent cafe^ in all thofe Politick Governours who at firft brought the Tvorld into both civtl and religious Societies , after they were grown rude and bar- barous j for as it had been impojfible to have brought them into civil Societies^ unlefs there had been fuppofed an /wc//- Ttation to Society in them, fb it had been equally tmpojjible to have brought them to embrace any particular way of Reli- gion^ unlefs there had been a natural propenfity to Religion implanted in them, and founded in the general belief of the extftencc of a Deity, And therefore we never find any of the ancient founders of Common-Tvealths go about to perfwade th^ people that there was a Go J, but this they fuppolcd and made their advantage of it, the better to draw the peoph on to embrace that way of worjhip^ which they delivered to them, as moft fuitable to their own defign. And this is plain- ly evident in the vaft difference of dejigns and interefis which were carried on in the Heathen world upon this general ap- prehenfion of a Deity, How came the world to be fo eafily a- bufed into Religions of all jlmpes and fajhions, had not there been a natural inclination in UKns fouls to Religion^ and an In- delible Idea of a Deity on the minds of men ? Were then this •pro f enjity groundlefsy nnd this Ideaficiitious, it were the greateft flur imaginable, which could be caft upon Nature, that when the infiintts of irrational agents argue fbmething real in them ; only man the moft Noble Being of the vifible 7iJorld^ muft be fatally carried to the belirf of that which never was. Which. Chap. I. The Div'we Authority of the Scriptures afferted. 365 Which yet hath fo great z force and awe upon man, that no- thing creates fo great anxieties in his life as this cloth ; no- thing lays him more open to the defi^ns of any who have an intent to abufe him. But yet further, thefe Politicians who firft, abufed the -noYld, in telling them there was a God^ did they themfelves believe there was a God ov no ? l^they did, then they had no fuch md as ahufing the world into fuch a belief If r% J/^ «o/-, upon what accounts did they believe there was none, when the people were fo ready to believe there was one > Was that as certain a tradition before that there was no God ^ as afterwards they made it to be that there was ? If fo, then all thofe feofle whom they perfmded to believe there was a God, did before, all believe there was none ; and how Can it poffibly enter into the reafon of any man to think, that people who had been brought up in the belief t\i?it there was no God at all, nor any fiate after this life, fhould all unanimoufly cfuit the princi- pki of education which tended Co much to their eafe and />/f^- /«re here, to believe there was a God ^nd another life, and there- by to fill themfelves full of fears and difcjuietments , merely be- caufe their Rukrs told them {b ? Again, if thefe Rulers them- felves were fo -wife as not to believe a D^/r/, can we imagine there ever was fuch an age of the w^orld wherein it fell out fo happily, that only the Rulers were wife,dind all the fubjech foolsl But it may be, it will be fa id, that all who were wife themfelves di^ not believe a Deity, but yet confented to thefra^ice of Religi- on , hecaufe it was fo ufcfuU for the Government of mankind ;. but can it be thought that all thele wife men which we muft fuppofe of feveral ranks and degrees, ( for Philofophers are not always States'?mn^ nor States-men Philofophers ) fliould fb readily concurr in fuch a thing which tended moft to the Inte- rtfl of the Prince, -^Vid to the abuie of the world ? Would none of them be ready to affert the truth, though it were but to- make a party of thciv own, and difcover to the people, that it was only the ambition and defign of their Governours which fought to bring the people to flavery by the belief of fuch thi72gs which were contrary to the tradition of thdv fore-fathers, and would make their /^i;^j, if they believed them, continually troublefom and unquiet ? Or if we could fuppofe things (hould hit thus in one Nation, what is this to the whole World which the Jtheijl here fuppofeth eternal ? What, did all the Rulers of 3^6 Origines Sacra : Book III. of the world exaflly agree in one moment of time ; or at leall in one age thus to abufe the World ? Did the defigns of Gover- nours and the credulity of all po^ie fall out to htib fukable to- gether } But on the contrary, we do not find that Goz^ermurs can have the judgments of ^eofle fo at their command , that they can make them to believe what they pleafe; if it were Co , we may well fay with that Atheiftical Fope^ Heu quam minimo regitur mundus ; What a twine thread 'will rule the world! But granting thefe things, (which any but an Atheiji will fay are/w- fojjibk ) yet whence fhould it come to fafs that th^ world which is generally led more by the opinions of their fore-fa^ thers^ than by reafon^ (hould to cancel that former tradition that there was no God^ that no remaining foot-fteps of it can be traced in any hiftory of thofe times ? Or did the Governors all confent to abolifh all records of it ? Vublick and written I grant they might, but not thofe out of men's minds and memo- ries ; which would have been for the eafe of thQ minds of their pofterity conveyed in fome fecret Cabala from Fathers to their Children, It may be it will be (aid , fo it was , but men dur(b not profefs it for fear of the Laws ; but, it is not evident that the Laws of all the ancient Common-wealths w ere ib (evere againfl Atheifm^ and withall how came fome of th^ wifefi and moft Philofophtcal men of Greece and Rome to embrace the ex- ifience of a Deity as a thing far more confonAnt to reafon than the contrary opinion, aod eftablifhed their belief on fuch evidences from nature it felf, that none of their Antagonifis were able to anfwer them ? It was not certainly the fear of Laws which made men rational and inquifitive into the natures and caufes of things ; and yet thofe who were fuch amidft the great Idola^ tries of the Heathen, and being defiitute of divine revelation^ yet freely and firmly ajfented to the exifienc§ of r Deity. Had it been only fraud and impo/lure which brought men to believe a God, whence came it to pals that this/r^«<^ was not difcove- red by thefe Philofophers , who were far better able by their nearneCs to thofe eldeft times , and much converfe abroad in other Nations (for Ibme travelled into %^gypt, Chaldea, Per- fa, India^ merely to gain knowledge ) to have found out fuch anirfipofiure, had it been fuch, than any of our modtmAthe- tfts ? W hence come thefe now in this almoft decrepit age of the o/^orld to be the fir^ fmellers out of fo great a defgn ? By what means. Chap. I. 'fhe Divine Authority of the Scriptures averted, ^67 means , what tokens and evidence came fuch an tmfoftme to their knowledge ? Becaufe^ forfooth, the world is ft ill apt tv he abufed by a pretence of Religion ; but he that doth not fee how filly and ridiculous a Sophifm that is, either by his own reafon^ or by what hath gone before ; hath wit and reafon little e- nough to be an Atheift, Some therefore who would feem a little wifer than the ijulgar fort of Atbeifts ( for it feems there is a 'vulgm among them too, I wilh it be more for their mean^ nefs than multitude) are fo far convinced of the unreafonable- nefs of judging that the belief oi a Detty came in by fraud ^ that finding it fb general and umverfal^ they attribute it to as ge- neral and univerfal a caufe^ which is the influence of theftars. So true ftill is that of the Foet^ Coelum ipfum fetimm ftuliitia-, for by what imaginable influence come the ftan to plant opini- ons in men's mmds fo deeply and univerfally ? But yet further, is this opinion which is thus caufed by the/^r/, true ovfalfe ? if the opinion be true^ we have what we defire ; iffalfe^ what malignant influence is this of the ftars, fo powerfully to /a//^^ men to the belief of a falflty ? How far are the ftars then from doing good to mankind , when they are fo influential to deceive the world ; but then, by what peculiar influence come fome men to be freed from this general impoflure? If the *caufe be Co univerfal^ the effe^ muft be univerfal too. But if only the nativity and continuance of Ibme particular religions may be calculated by the/^r/, (as Cardan and Vaninus^ athe- I'^xzd!^^ [uppofe ) whence then comes the general propenfity and inclination to Religion in all ^^ej and nations of the World ? If it be then caujed by the Hf^'t/iw^ in general, it muft be pro- duced necefjarily and univerfally^ and fotobe an Atheift^ were impoffible ; if it be caufed by the influence of fome particular ftars, then when that influence ceafeth, the world would uni- verfally relapfe into Atheifm. So that there is no poffible way oi avoiding this univerfal consent of mankind^ as an argument that there is a God^ when all the pretences of the Atheift a- gainft it are fo weak., ridiculous and impertinent. The only thing then left for him, is, to deny the truth of the SeB, i ^■, thing, VIZ.. that there is fuch an univerfal confent; becaufe fome perfons have been found in the world who have not agreed with the reft of mankind in this opinion. To this I anfvver , (which.was the fecond particular for cleariag this argument) thsx 3(SS Orlgines Sacra : Book III.. !• that the JtJ/efJP of thefe ferfons is not fufficient to mamfefi the confent not tobeuniverfal, and to arife from a dilate of nature. For I demand of the greateft Atheift^ Whether it be fufficient to fay, that it is not ?iatural for men to have two legs, becaufc Ibme have been horn with one , or that it is not natural for men to defre life ( which the Atheift loves fo dearly) becaule there have been ^o many who have taken away their own lives ? If it be faid that thefe are Mcnfiers and Anomalfs in nature^ and therefore not to be reckoned in the regular account oftbingSy the fame I may with as great reafon fay of Atbeifis, that they are to he diffunged out of the Cenfm of fuch who aB upon free principles of reafon ; becaufe there may be Ibme peculiar rea- fon s given of their difl'ent from the reft of mankind in the de- nial of a Deity, We fee by the old Philofophers how far the affeBatton of Novelty ^ and ambition of being cried up for no vulgar -wits, may carry men to deny fuch things^ which are moit common and obvious in the -world. Is there any thing more plain and evident to reafhi., than that it implies a con- tradtEiion for the fame thing to be and not to be at the fame time , and yet if we believe Arif;otle , w^ho largely difputes a- Lih t) g^i^ft them, t^(rt Ji nvi^ CI etvToi 7? hJ^i^^ctl (petai to aM u) xJ m © * There ivas fome ivho affirmed that # thing might be and not be at the fame time. What fo evident in nature as motion ^ yet the Yhilofopher is well known who difputed againft it, and thought himCdf fubtile in doing fo too ? What are men more aifured of, than that they live, and yet ( if it be not too dog- matical, even in that to believe the Sccpticks ] it was a thing Hone could be affured of ? What are our fenfes more aflured of than that the fnow is ivhite^ yet ail the Fhilofophers were not of that opinion ? Is this then fufficient reafon on which to deny an univerfal confent^ becaufe Ibme Fhilofophers oppofed it, when De Kat.Deor. it is mofl undoubtedly true, which TuUy fharply fpeaks of the ^^^' 3- ancient Fhilofophers, Nihil tarn abfurdum e]uod non dixerit ali- e^ui6 Fbilofophorum ; there TV as no abjurdityfo great, but it found a Fhilofopher to vouch it : But in this cafe thofe Fhilofophers who queftioned the extftence of a Deity, though they were not for number to be compared with thofe who ailerted it, yet were not (6 incxcufable therein as our modern Athti/l-s; becaufe they then knew no other way of Relis^ion, but that which was joyned with horrible fuperflttion, and ridiculous rites Q^worfinp) they were Chap.i. 5^^ Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajjerted, 369 y^tv^ ft rangers to any thinq^ o{ dfvine revelation^ or to any real miracles wrought to confirm it, and to fuch a wa^ offerving God which is moft agreeable to the Divine nature^ mo^fuitahle to our re a fen, moft effeBual for advancing truc goodnefs in the v;orld. And although this moft excellent Religion, vil. the Chri- ftian, be fubjei^l: to many fcandals by reafon of the corruptions which have been mixed with it by thofe who have profejjed it, yet the Religion it felf is clear and untainted, being with great integrity preferved in the (acred records of it. So that now ^- theifm hath far lefs to plead for it/J/than it had in the midjl of the ignorance zndfuperftUion of the Heathen Idolatries. But if we ftiould grant the Jtbeifi more than he can prove, That the number of fuch who denied a Deity hath been great in all ages of the world ; is it probable they fhould fpeak the fence o^ nature, whofe opinion, if it were embraced, would dijjolve all ties and obligations whatfbever ; would let the world loofe to the higheft //cf^ric^/wf/}, without check or control!^ and would in time overturn all cit^i/ Societies ? For as 71//Z/ hath ^^ ^f^'-^T' largely (hewn, T*^/^^ away the being and providence of God out ' -^'^ ^-y ^^ " of the world, and there follows nothing hut perturbation and confufion in it, not only all fanclity, piety and devotion u deftroy^ ed, but all faith, vertue and humane Societies too ; which are impoffible to be upheld without Religion, ^s not only he, but Tlato, Ariftctle and Plutarch, have fully demonftrated. Shall luch perfcns then who hold an opinion ^o contrary to all other dilates of nature , Tcithtr Jpeak tht fence of nature , than they who have ajjerted the Belief of a Deity ^ which tends fo much to advance nature, to regulate the world^ and to rejorm the lives ofwen^ Certainly if it were not a dictate of nature that there was a God, it is impoffible to conceive the world^o]i\di be fo confiant in che belief of him, when the thoughts of him breed (b many anxieties in mens minds, and withall, fince God is nei- ther obviom to fenfe , nor his nature comprehenjible by hi^mane reafon. Which is a ^vongQr evidence it is a character of him- felf which God hath imprinted on the mmds of men , which makes them fo unanimoufly agree that he ps, when they can nei- ther /'e^ him, nor yet fully comprehend him. For any whcle Nati- on, which have confented in thQ denial of a. Deity, VJt have no evi- dence at all ; fomQjufpicions k is true there were at fir it concern- ing fomt y^vy barbaro^fs people in America, but it is fince evident, B b b though exem 370 Origines Sacra; : Book III. though they are grofly miftaken as to the Ti^ture of God ^ yet they worjJnp fomething inftead of him, fuch as the Toupmam- houhs, Cartbes^ Vatagens^ Tafma^ and Others ; of the laft of Mdend adl.i. v^hich VoJJlm frOHl One Qhrijtofhorm Arciffeivski , a Poloman Del 0 .p. 2. Q^jjtiernan^ who was among them, hath given a large account of their Religion^ and the manner of their worjhippmg of their gods^ both good and bad. And that which among thefe Indi- ans much confirms our prelent argument^ is, That only thofe who have been the moft harharoiH and favage Nations^ have h^^n fufpeBed of ir religion ^ but the more civilized they have been, the more evident thdr fenfe of Religion. The Peruvians V. Acojiam.ls, worfliip one chief Gc^, whom they QdWytrachochaydXid Pacha- ^T?rM ■ / c^^<^K which is as much as the Creator of Heaven and Earth. ' ipLPolitic. -^^^ of thQ Re Itgton of the Mexicans^ Ltpftm and others fpeak. . So that the nearer any have approached to civility and knoTv- ledge, the more ready they have been to o-wn d. Detty ^ and none have had fo little fenfe of it, as they who are almoft de- generated to Brutes ; and whether of thefe two now comes nearer, to reafon, let any one who hath it judge. Se5I* 1 4. Another great evidence, that God hath imprinted a charaHer 2, or Idea of himlelf on the mmds of men, is, becaufe fuch things are contained in this Idea of God, which do necej/arily imply his exijience. The main force of this argument lies in this. That 7vhich we do clearly and diflin^ly perceive to belong to the na- ture and ejfence of a thing , may be ii^ith truth affirmed of the thing) not that it may be affirmed with truth to belong to the nature of the thing, for that were an empty Taufology , but it may be affirmed with truth of the thing it s felf, as if I clearly perceive upon exadt enquiry, that to be an animal doth belong to the nature of man, I may with truth affirm that man ts a living creature ; if I find it demonfirably true that a Triangle hath three angles equal to two right ones, then I may truly af- firm it of any Triangle-, but now we afTume, that upon the moft exaEl fearch and enquiry, I clearly perceive that necejjary ex- iftence doth immutably belong to the nature of God \ therefore, I may with as much truth affirm, that Godexifts, as that man is a living creature ; or, a Triangle hath three angles equal to two right ones. But becaule many are fo apt to fufpeB fbme kind of Sophifm in this argument , when it is managed from the I- dea in mens minds , becaufe that feems to imply only an obje- Uive chap. I . The Divme Authority of the Scriptures ajferted. 371 Bive reality in the mind, and that nothing can be thence infer- red as to the exigence of the thing whofe Idea it is , I there- fore (hail indeavour to manifeft more clearly the force of this argument, by proving feverally the fuppojttions which it ftands j. upon, which are thele three : i. That clear and diftinB ferce- ^/fj, ftion of the mind is the greatefi evidence we can have of the truth of any thing. 2. That we have this clear perception that neceffary exifience doth belong to the nature of God, :} . That if vecejjary exifience doth belong to God's nature , // unavoidably follows ^ that he doth extfi. Nothing can be defired more plain or full to demonfirate the force of this argument ^ than by pro- ving every one of thefe. I. That the greatefi evidence we can have of the truth of . a things is^ a clear and difiincl perception of it in our minds. For otherwife the rational faculties of man's foul would be wholly ufelefsy as being not fitted for any end at all, if upon a right ufe of them, men were ftill liable to be deceived, I grant the imperfeBion of our minds m thisprefent/^fe is very greatwhich makes us fb obnoxious to errour and mifiake ; but then that im- ferfeBion lies in the pronenefs in man's mind to be led by inter efi and prejudice in the judgment of things j but in fuch things as are purely ^eculative and rational^ if the mind cannot be cert a in it is not deceived in them, it can have no certainty at all of any mathematical demonfirations. Now we find in our own minds a clear and convincing evidence in fome things, as foonas they are propounded to our underfiandings, as that a thing can be and not beat the fame time 5 that a non-entity can have no proper attri- butes ; that while I reafon and difcourfe^ I am ; thele are fb clear y that no man doth fufpedl himfelf deceived at all in them. Be- fides, if we had no ground of certainty at all mom judging things, to what purpofe is there an Idea of true znd falfe in our minds, if it be impoffible to know the one from the other? But I fay not, that in all perceptions of the mind we have certain evidence of truth, but only in fuch as are clear and difiinB; that is, when upon the greateft confederation of the nature of a things there appears no ground or reafon at all to doubt concerning it ; and this vcm^fuppoje the mind' sabfiraB ion wholly from the fenfes ; for we plainly find that while we attend to them, we may judge our felves very certain and yet ht deceived, as thofe who have an Merif?n in their eyes , may judge with much confidence that B b b 2 they 372: Origwes Sacra : Book III. they r^t things as ckarij and dtfi'mBly as any other doth. Be- fides, there are many things taken for granted by r^en, which have no t^utdence of reafon at all In them : Now if men will jfidge of the tnith of things by fuch principles, no wonder if '^ they be deceived. But when we fpcak of clear and dtjlmtl per- cepmn, we fuppofe the 7?7ind to proceed upon evident principles Oireafon, or to have fuch notions oithmgs^ which as far as we can perceive by the light of reafon^ do agree with the natures of the things we apprehend ; if in fuch things then there be no ground of certainty^ it is as much as to fay, owv faculties are to no purpofe ; which highly reflects either upon God or nature. It is a noble cjuefiion as any 'is in Philofophj, What is the certain KEiliieiov of the truth of things, or what ground of certainty the wind hath to proceed upon in its judgment of the truth of fuch ohjeSh as are reprefented to it ? Nothing can render the Fhilo- Jophj of Epicurm more judlj fufpeBed to any rational (ind tne^ui- fnivemind^ than his making the/f??/^^ the only certain cojj^ey- ers of the truth of things to the ?;j/>zi. The jtnfes I grant do not in themfel'ues deceive any, but if I make the impreffions of fenfe to be the only rule for the mind to judge by of the truth of things, I make way for the greateft impofiures^ andthemoft erring judgments. For if my mind affirms every / hing to be in its proper nature according to that Idea which, the imagi?iation hath received from the imprejjions upon the organs of fenfe ^ it will be impoflhle for me ever to underfiand the right natures of things, Becaufe the natures of things may remain the fame^ when all thole things in them which affed the organs of fenje may be altered, and becaufe the various motion and configuration of tht particles of matter may make fuch an imprejfion upon the fe»fes, which may caufe an Idea in us of that in the //?/?3!^j them - felves, which yet may be only in the ifjanner of fenfation ; as fome Philofophers fuppofe it to be in heat and cold. Now if the mmd judgeth of the nature of things according to thofe Idea's xvhich come from the impreffions made upon the organs of {en fc ; how is it pojfihle it (hould ever come to a right judgment of the natures of things ? So that in reference even to the groflcft material beings^ it mufl be the perception only of the mmd^ which can truly inform us of their proper nature and ejjence. Be- fides, there are many Idea's of things in the mind of man which are capable to have properties demonfirated of therii, which ne- ver Chap. I. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted\ 373 v^r owed their original to our fsnfes ; and were never imported to the mind at the Keys of the fenjes. Such are moft Mat he- mattcal figures which have their feculiar properties and demon- fir ations \ fuch are all the mutual re/peBs of thmgs to each other, which may be as certain and evident to the mind as its felf is ; now it is plain by this, that all certainty oiknow- ledge is not conveyed by the ienfes ; but our trueft way of certain underfianding the nature of any things is by the clea^ and dtfiincl perception of the mtnd^ which is founded on the Truth of our faculties ; and that however we may be decei- ^- tng, a horfe without wings ; thence it ncceflarily follows, that the joynmg of thele things together, was merely zn atl of the mind ; but now I cannot conceive a Triangle not to have three angles equal to two right onesy nor a man that hath not r^ tionality belonging to him ; for if I divide thefe attributes from them, I deftroy their natures ; and therefore Xht joyning of thefe together is not any mere atl of the mind-^ but the^ are fuch things as are implyed in the very notion of them, and thcrcfovQ immutably belongs to them. So now, when I. con- ceive the notion of a body, I can imagine all perfe^ions belong- ing to it, without conceiving it neceffatily to exifi\ for it may be a body ftill, though it hath not its being from it felf\ but when 1 conceive a Being abfolutely perfeB, it is impojfible to imagine it (hould have its being from any o/^^r ; and if it be from its felf it muft of neeeffity exifi. For though the mind ftill be apt to doubt, whether extfience in this Idea be only a wo^^ of cogitation ; yet that doubt may be eafily removed, if -the mind doth but attend to this, that at leaft pojfibility of exifienc^ chap. I . the Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted, 3 7 5- exifietjce doth belong to all thofe Beings which we have a ck^v Idea of in our minds ; and the rcafon why we attribute bare fDjphility to them, is becaufe we apprehend fome reafon in OUT minds which k^eps us from attnbuting necejfity oi ex;- fience to them, as that it is not implied in its nature^ t)r that it doth defend on fome other hetng^ or that it wants infinite foTver^ &C. Now all thcfe reafons which make ws attribute bare po/fMity of exifience to any beings are taken away when we conceive a being abfolutely perfecf ; . for then exifience is implyed among the number of perfeBions ; and this being is independent^ upon all Others, and infinitely powerfiul ; fb that nothing can hinder its exifience ; and therefore we muft con- elude that neceffuy of exifience doth im.mutably belong to the »*?^«r5 and w^fic« of Go^,'and is not anyM?iconlyof our conce- pion \ becaufe if we take away necejfny of exifience from God^ we lofe the nc4ion of a Being abfolutely perfe^. The third thing , that if neceffary exifience belongs to the nature of God, he doth exifi^ not only follows as a neceflary conclufion from the other two, as the premifes, but is in itfelf evident to any ones reafon *, for it implies no lefs than a con- tradition for a being to exifl; neceffarily^ and yet it be queftio* nable, Whether he doth exifi or no ? Thus much I fuppofe may fuflSce here to explain and enforce this argument ; if any ^^^ j^g^ Cartes. are yet unfatisfied, I referr them to thofe judicious Author s^ Metaphyf.Me-* who have made it their peculiar bufinefs to manage it,and ww- i^if-& Ref^. dicate it from, all objections : which falls in only here- as sn ^^-^ff' a evidence that God hath imprinted ^chara^er of himfelf on the ^-ij^^-g ggainft' minds of men^ feeing we have fo clear and difiinB an Idea of Atheifm.//^. i, fuch a Being, from whom, if we take away necefiity oi exi- ch. s. append, fience, we deftroy that notion which our minds have of an ah- ^^' ^ ^> 7- folutely perfeB Being. This is the /r/? 22/^^ whereby we can conceive an Infinite Being may make himfelf known to man^ kind, by imprinting an Indelible charaBer of himfelf upon the /^«/, which can be attributed to «(?«g befides himfelf without doing manifefi violence to OMX o^n faculties, zndi fufpeBingouT felves deceived in things which'are mod clear and evident lo us. I come to the fecond evidence which God hath given us of 5f& 15-;; his own exifience, which is the mark, and imprefftsn which he bath left of an Infinite IVifdom and Counfel in the appearances which are in nature. There needs no gx^dX. Criticifm to find out .. 3 76 Origines Sacm : Book III, out the true Author of all the worh of natuYe\ the works themfelves ^nw the Author as plainly, as if his cffigUs were drawn upon them. If the great curiofity and contrivance of any artificial engine fpeak the excellency of the Mechanical wit of the framer of it ; what ridiculous folly will it be to impute that rare mechantjm of the works of nature to the ^/;»^ znd fortuitous motic7i of fbme particles of matter ? Sup- pofe a multitude of Z^^^^rj cafually thrown together , (hould fall fb hanfomely in order, that we might read in them the n^mes of Troja^ J^^'^o^ uit , made up of the moHfubtle and mo'v-able atoms , thence motion came into the ieveral parts fuitable to the different conformation of them. And becaufe thofe atoms of which th^fmlh com- pofed, are capable oC fen fat ion ^ thence it comes to pafs, that it fees in the eye , hears in the ear , and fmeHs in the noftrtls. This is the mofl which is made of the opinion ol Epicurus by the late fedulom Vindicator of him ,, which yet himfelf calls intokranda opinio \ and it will appear to be (b, not only as contradi£ling, what God himfelf hath delivered concerning man^ but what reafon it felf will eafily f^ggefi from the con- federation of the feveral p<^r/j oi man's body. It muft be confef- fed there were Ibme Vhilofophtrs elder than Epicunts , who were much inclined to this opinion, as Democritm^ Empedocles^ AnaxagoraSj and others ; yet we find thofe who more narrow- ly fearched into the natures oi living creatures,^ were thereby brought to acknowledge a diuine prcvidtnce , which with a great ditdX- oC wifdom did order the feveral parts of animals , and adapted them to their peculiar ufes. And although Ari- ftotle in his books de partibtts animalmm ^ hath faid enough to refute the fond opinion of thole '?hilofophers\ yet none hath handled this arg^ument with more exaBnefs and accuracy^ and with a more peculiar reflexion on Epicurm^ than Galen hath done in his excellent piece De uju partium. Which GaJJendus Gajfejid'To. 2, thinks Galen writ with a kind of Enthuftafm upon him (adeo lib. 2. fe^. 3. tot um opus videtur confcripum Iv^trtaLsim^ jand fo that all thole feventeen books of his on that fubje(!l: , are a kind of 119th . Tfalm in Thilofophy , or a perpetual Hymn upon the praile of the great Creator, a juft Commentary on thofe words of the Vfalmili, Pfal. 139. 14. 1 am fearfully and -wonderfully made\ m^rveHo^is are thy works ^ and that my Soul knoiveth right 7i^elL G c c 2 In '380 Ortgines Sacne : Book III. In the entrance of thofe Books ^ Galen fir ft (liews the great va- net) of ^arts which is in feveral animals fuitable to their fe- Veral natures-^ t\\thorfehzQdXi^Qo(h\'i,fwiftnefsZndifrtde^ hath the ftrongeft boofs and mofi curled main 'y the Lien becaule of his fiercenefs and courage hath his ftrength lying in his teeth and faws ; the Bull in his hems ; the Boar in his tusks ; the Hart and Hare being timorous creatures^ their /?jr/i are made fitteft for ^/^^^ : but 7}7an becaufe he hath a principle of rea^ Jon in him, hath no defenfive or oj^fw/Ji/e weapons in his ^0^/, but he hath hands to make ufe of both ; which being joyned with, and imployed by his reafon, far exceed d\\ tlioie advan- tages which any other creaturei have, being imployed not on- ly to defend himfelf, but to build houfes, make cleat hsy arms, nets , what-ever is ufefull for himfelf, or hurt full to thole creatures which he hath command over ; but becaule wj« was made for ficiety and civil converfe , therefore his hands were not only imployed to defend himlelf or hurt other creatures, but for the mutual benefit and advantage of mankind-^ for by thele were Laws written^ "Temples bmlt, all inftruments of Arts framed ; by them we enjoy the benefit of others wits^ we can difcourfe with ?latOy Artftotle, Hippocrates^ and other an^ cimts , though at fuch a diftance from us. Now that the configuration of parts is not the caufe of the ufe of them af- terwards ; as the Lions pa^v of his courage^ the Bull's horns of hh fiercenefs y or thQ fiendernefs of the Hart of Its fern fulnefs; appears by this , becaufe the young ones of the feveral kinds of animals , before their parts are grown up , llrive to make the fame ufe of them which the others doe. As Galen faith, he had often feen a Bull-calf pujlnng with his ^^ the peculiar and admirable fair ick of the 9'a, in the e/f- i^^wr/j the other parts of the face, in the twelfth the ^ j^^j of the ^.?c>^, and fo in the thirteenth, in the fourteenth and /y^- teenth thQ genitals, in the Jixtcenth the arteries^ 'veins, and nerz'es, and in the laft the peculiar difpofition and /^«r£? of all thefe p^r/.i, and the ujefulnefs of the whole r/ty^w .- Which is zs great as can be in any 22/ory^'whatlbever, .which is for us to take nofice of the admirable ivijdom of God in coiitri-vino- the feveral parts of thQ body of man ■ So that, that whole ^^o>^ contains in it a moft full and pregnant demonfi ration of a Z)fi/7, which every man carries about with him in the/r«- Hur^ of his body, on which account men need not go out of themfelves to find proof of a Deity, w^hether they confider their mmds or their bodies, of which it may be more truly faid than Her adit us of old did of his Stove,Etiam hie Diifunt. lifm'lT'^^' ^^ ^hat.of all perfons, I iliould moft wonder at thofe whofe ' ^^^' '^' /;f;^p/o)'»;£«r particularly leads them to xht under fiandmg the parts and nature of mans body, if the pro'verb be not a great injury, to them, fince they have fuller mfght into this demon- firation of a Deity in the Fabrick of mans /'^i/, than many c//?eri who converfe only with fome jejune ^udfaplefs writings. And certainly, \\hcitQ\ cr \s imagined to the c(?7?r?-^r7 by men of weak underfiandmgs, the beft way to cure the ivorld of Atheifm, is m/^ Philojophy, or a jearch into the natures of /fe^j ; which the more Je^/j and profound it is, the more im- poffible will it be found to explicate all the phenomena of ;/^- /«r^ by mere matter and motion. It was wifely obferved of a great per fen and Vhilofcpher, that a narrow 2iX\d flight inffe^i- on into nature, inclined men of weak heads to Atheijm-, but a more thorovv-/«/?^^^ into the caujes of things, made them .more evidently /^^ the necefjary dependance of things on the great ^hap. I . The Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted. 383 great and n^ife Creator of them. A little kno7vledge of Vhi- lofophy is apt to make mens heaJs di'z^z.j^ and then in dan- ger o( falling into the gulf ofAtkeifm^ biit a tnore careful and diligent ^kn> of it, brings them into fohmty and their right 7i;its again. Such a flight inffeBkn had the follojvers of Epi- curus into the nature of things 5 for when they found how in the prefent ftate of the world the various f7^otion/and configu- ration of tliQ particles of matter would handfomely j^/t^c ma- ny appearances of nature ^ they, drunk with thtfuccefs, reel prefently into an Infinite fpace^ and there imagine they behold infinite worlds made of the concretion of Atoms ^ and ever fince their eyes have been fo dufied with thefe little At cms, that they could fee nothing elle in the -world but them. Which how^r£?/} and unreafo?iahle it is, will appear from our prefent fubjeil: ; for who but Lfuretimov Epicurus could ever think /Z?^; ^«r nofirils were at firfi fajhioned as they are merely by the 'vio- lent impulfe ofi the air 7V it hin^which would force it felf a paf- fage out ? But how came the air into the body before it was forced out ? did it fi^ break open the lips^ make all that round cavity in the mouthy for a pafia^e through the afpera arteria ? but if when' it was in, it would come out again, was not the mouth wide enough to let it go? or did the firft manjhut his mouth on purpofe to find another vent for the air ? if fo, how chance the force of the air did not carry away the epiglottis ? or if it got fafely up to the nofe, how came it not to force a faJJ'age out about the eyes rather than to go do7Pnfo low firft? But if we believe thefe vdiVQ contrivers of mans body ^d\\ the/;;- ward vejjels of the body were made by the courfe of water ^ as channels are ; but how is it poffible, to imagine that the Oefo- fhagus and thQ fiomach (hould be fo curioudy contrived by the mere force of water ? and !hat all the Intefiines fhouldberaade only as channels to let it out again when it was once in ? but how comes then fuch a kind of reciprocation and Peri/laltick motion in thoie vefiels ? how come the feveral coats of them ; to be fo firm ? if it had been only a forced paJJ'age, it would have been direct and through the fubfiance of the parts, as we find it to be in all forced paj] ages in the body of the earth, . Befides, if the water received into the fiomach forced the paf [age through the^«fj, how comes it not to rm in the chan- nel it had made for it felf ^ or did it not like that pafage when \ 384 Orighes Sacr^ : Book III. ■when other things came into it, and therefore found out a more {ecret one into the bladder ? but if that we^e made by the water ^\\o\v came it to be fo full of membranes^ and ib fub- jeB to d dot at ion ? Thus ridkutoas will men make them (elves, rather than jhew themfelves men irr owning and adoring that infinitely 'wife and fjwerfui God, who orders all things in the world according to the counfel of his Wdl. What can be more "^lain and evident than the peculiar ufefulnefs of the fe- veral parts of mans bodj is ? What other intent can be ima- gined that man is formed with a mouth, but only for taking in of nottrijhment , and for receiving and letting forth of ^/r ? or that an iw/^iwr is fo ready to of en his mouth, but that there are ^r^^/j and w///4 for him to fuck in order to his nou- rijljment ? Why fliould the Oefofhagus be fb hoUoji; and the ftomach fb 7/^iJ^, but that one was provided for the better con^ 'veyance of the meat down, and the other for thQ fermentation of it ? Whence come all the other vefels to be fo conveni- ently placed, were it not for the dijhibution of ticurifhment into the feveral parts, or for conveying away the excrements of it ? Can any one think that the feveral mpifcles and ten- dons fliould be placed in the more fblid parts for any other .end than for the better motion of them ? or that the nerves lliould be derived from the brain into the feveral parts of the body for any other defgn than to be the infiruments of fenfe and motion ? or that the continual mGtion of the heart (hould be for any other purpofe, than for receiving and diftrtbutien of the ^/ocJ through the arteries into the p/?rf j of the /'o^ > or that the f;e with all its curious /^^r/V>^ fliould be only ac- cident ally tmployed in feeing ? Thefe things are fo plain, that . however the Epicureans may more ealily lofe themfelves and deceive others in explaining the appearances of nature in fbme inanimate beings, yet when they come with their blind con- courfe of Atoms to give an account of the parts of animals, they mifcrably befool themfelves and expofe themfelves only to contempt and pity. It wereeafie to mxAtx'^Xy examples in this kind, but I fliall only mention one thing more, which is, if all the parts of mans body have no higher original than the con^ courfe of Atoms in the firft man and woman, by what were the umbilical vef Is formed whereby the Child in the womb receives its nounfnment ? uy what Atoms was the paflage of the chap, r . The Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted, ^ 385' the fiiccm mttrltim framed from the Mother to the Child ? how come thofe vejjds to clofe up lb naturally upon the birth of the ChUd and it to fcek its nourtjhment in quite another ^ way 1 Will the f articles of matter which by their concretion formed the firft pair, falve this too ? Thus ftill we lee how im- fojfihk it is (to go no further than omfelves) to give any to- lerable account of things without an infinite fower and Being which produced all thefe things, and hath left ^o plain an in- fcription of himje If u^^on the works of nature^ that none but thofe who JJmt their eyes can abfiain (vom feeing it. I come now to the third e^cidence of a Deity ^ which [^^that Se^, 17. there are fome beings in the world which cannot depend upon \* matter or motion ft» e, that there are fome //?im//^/ and imma- terial Subfiances or Beings (for if the thing be acknowledged, it is unbecoming a man to cont^d about words) the confe- quence of this for the proving a Deity^ neither hath been nor I llippofe will be denied by fuch who queftion an infinite Be- ings the fame principles leading to the denying and the proof of both, and immaterial Beings being the rtrongefl: proof that there is fomething above matter in the world. If there be then fuch things in the World which matter and motion can- not be the caufes of, then there are certainly fpirttual and immaterial Beings^ and that I fhall make appear both as to the minds of men^ and (bme extraordinary effeBs which are produced in the world. I. I begin with the nature of the foul of man. And herein I muft confine my felf to thofe arguments which dire^ly prove my prefcnt purpoje, and on that account muft quit all thole . common arguments to prove the fouPs immortality from the attributes of God\ for all thele do fuppofe the exifience of a Deity as already evident ; neither can I rely with fafety on the way which fome have taken to prove the immortality of thtfcul merely from the phenomena of jenfation^ which they endeavour to prove cannot be performed by mere matter and motion ; for granting all this, yet the utmoft that can be proved by it is no greater immortality in ouv fouls than in the fouls of Brutes 'y and in the lence in which that is admitted, I fuppofe an Epicurean will not deny the foul of man ^ to be immortal as Demonax in Lucian laid, when he was asked whether the foul were immortal or no, it is (faid he) but as Ddd a'l ^86 Origmes Sacra; : Book III. aO things elfe are', for thofe who make the foul to be notbivg but feme more /^/'//^ and active f articles o{ waiter, do not think that upon death they are aimihdated, but that only they are Mfperfed and dijfipated, or in the Vlato-nifis phrafe, may re- turn to the foul of the world. Thefe ways I cannot think to be fUiHcient frchatims of fuch n'fpiritaal and in^material Beijig in man which we now enquire for, much lefs can I make ufe of fb precarious and infirm an hjpothefis as pr^c-exiJUnce, which makes men apt to fjjfpeft the c&gency of fuch rcafons which tend to prove the immortalitj of the fcul, which are linked with d-ftippofition^ not only inevident either to fenfe or reafon, but likewife needhfs and impertinait. For I know no one ar- gument which doth diredly prove the immateriality of the foul, that doth in the leaft inferr any necefity of pr^-^xifience^ but on the lame accounts it will prove the foul's eternity. Be- ing therefore thus at liberty to enquire into the nature of the foul confidered in hcvfelf, our only way mud be to find out fuch peculiar properties in thf^ foul of man, which cannot be failed ov\ fuppcfitmij there were nothing elfe but matter ?,r[di motion in the world. Suppofing then that 2i\\ fevfation inmian doth arife from corporeal motion, which is fo ftrongly aOerted hy the modem Thilofophers, ' and that the highefl: conceptions which depend on ienfe can amount no higher than imagina- tion,w^ixoh is evident 5 if it can then be proved that there is a principle of aclion in man which proceeds in a different way of operation th^n fen fat ion doth, and that there are fuch ope» rations of the foul which are not imaginatic7ij, it will be then clear that there is a principle in man higher than matter and motion. Now although it be a task fufficiently difficult to explain the manner of fenfaticn it felf in a mere mechanical -way, fuppofing no higher principle than mere master, yet it will appear far more difficult, nay i?}^poJfihle without a fpiri- tual or immaterial Being to falve fuch appearances in man which tranjcend the power of imagination ; which will ap- pear by thefe following operations of the mind which every one who hath it, may find within himfelf.' I. CorreSling the errors of imagination. For if all our fer^ ceptions were nothing elfe but the images of corporeal things left in the brain, tliQ judgme?n of the mind mufl of ncceffity be according to the impreffiojis, which are made upon the Organs Chap. I . The Divine Authority of the Scriptures averted, 3 87 Organs of fenfe. But now if our minds can and do form ap-~ prehenftons oUhmgs quitQ different from thofe which are con- veyed by fenfe J there mud be a higher principle of knowledge in man than imagination is. For which the common inftance of the juft magnitude of the Sun is very plain ; If we judge ac- cording to the image which is conveyed to the hrain by our eyes^ we can never imagine the Sun to be bigger than he Teems to us to be ? nay though the fight be advantaged by the help •of Telefcopes, it cannot receive fuch an Image or Idea of the Sun which anfv^ers to its juft magnitude, 'viz,. that it is 160 times bigger than the Earth. From v.'hence now^ comes this apprehenfion of the hignefs of the Sun above that proportion which can poffibly come in at owvfenfes? If it be faid, that hy the obfervation of the lejjening of objects according to the froportion of difiance^ the mind may come to under ftand how much bigger the Sun may be than he feems^ I grant it, but withal encjuire how the imagination comes to liave proportions and difiances which are mere refpeBs, and can have no corpo- real phantafms whereby to be reprefented to it ; Co that by this very way of ratiocination it is evident ^ that there is Ibme - principle in man beyond imagination. Again, when the mind by ratiocination hath proceeded thus far and finds the Sun to be {q great ^ what Idea is there of this magnitude in the mindl the mind cannot fix ft felf on any thing but it muft have an Idea of it ; from whence comes this Idea ? not from corpo- real phantafms ; for none of them could ever convey the due magnitude of the Sun to the mind^ and therefore ^^ forming of this Idea muft be a pure aB of Intelletlion which correBs the errors of imagination, and is a principle above it. So in the fight of diftick , when under -water^ the reprefentation of it by the fenfe to imagination is as crooked ; for corporeal mo- ■ tion carries things to the ^'f*, without any judgment upon them j the eye conveys the i;?2^^e to the brain ; and according to the rules of corporeal perception muft prefently take every thing for f r«e which is conveyed thither ; now from what prin- ciple is it that this error of our fenfes is correBed ? So in many other things wherein our imaginations are (\\i\\.q puzzled, and when we go according to them, it is impoffible to appre- hend things as our reafon tells us they are j thus as to the An- tipodes our imaginations are wholly of the mind of the ancient Sy Ddd 2 that 5§§ Origines Sacrt£ : Book III. that the Antipodes to us mud needs be in danger of knock- ing their heads againft the Stars, and if they go upon any thing, it muft be their heads, and that that part of the Hea- vens which is in the other Hemifphere is below us ; thefe are pertinacious errors of imagination while we adhere to that, and are only corrigible by our reafcn, which makes it evi- dent to be otherwile. Belides, there are many things our reafon and under fianding inform US that they may be, and yet our imaginations can form no IJ^^ of them ; let an Epi- curean Philofopher try the power of his imagination in his Inane ox Infinite empty [pace, and he will loon find, that as ft^rong as his Vhancy is, it will foon tire and retreat as not being able to courfie through fo unimaginable a Space. So for eternal duration our reafon tells US the thmg is pojjibley but when our imaginations begin to fradle up fbme concepti- ons of it, they are prefently ry/;^^both ^wix together ; which will make a ftrange Idea of eternity ; the cafe is the lame in the infinite di^ipbtlity of ^«.4rt?/V;;, which Epicurus waS Ibme- what ^3i^'jrg of when he Jm^J the thing. But how many Mathematical Problems are there which will jade our /w^- ginaticns prefently, and yet our reafon ftands flill and af- fures us of the pojfibility of the things, as in tvjo lines coming ■ nearer flill to each other, and yet never meetings and in many Other things , which moft clearly evidence that there is a higher faculty in man which exceeds matter and motion, when it is able thus to corre(ft th^ faults and to fupply the defecis of imagination, SeB, 1 8. a. Reflex aBs of the mind upon it felf argue a higher jDri;;-. ^^/;/e than imagination. That there are fuch things are e\iident' to any one who hath any ufe of cogitation ; and if any one doubt of it, Yii^v^vj dotibting argues he \i^t\\reflexa^s 5 for he could not doubt whether he had ox no, but by refleBion up- on himfelf Now that reflex aBs (liouldbecaufcd through w^f- ter and mot ion, ov through mere imagination is unconceivable. For we fee no w^r/(jr can ^^ upon itfelf -, indeed one p^r? of extended matter may a^H: upon another, but not p^r^/)' upon it felf\ Xht extremities of tht fingers can never /^; their ejes too ; and yet afterwards can fcarce tell themfelves what they have looked on all that while. Sometimes the mind fits and compares phan-* tafms together, ^ndfiorts it felf in /om;^^ them into feveral ranks and orders , and making matches between fiich things which are fure to have no affinity with each other, which are thence called entia rationis^ or the creatures of the mmd. And can all thefe and many other fuch o^eratiom w^hich men are ccnfctotfs to themfelves of, be nothing elfe but the motion of Ibme flegmatick matter , the read: ion of the brain , and the mere effdis oi Imagination ? 3 . The profund (peculations of the mind argue a popper far above imagination and corporeal motion, I wonder how Epi- curm his foul^ when , if we believe him, it wasmade up of Atoms, could ever imagine an Infinite Vacuity ? CoUld mere Atoms ever dijpute whether they were Atoms or no ? For I doubt not but Epicurus was fain to argue much againft him- felf, before he could perfuade Kimi'df to fo fiupendious a piece of folly ? Were there nothing in man but mere corporeal mo- tion, whence came the d^Jpute-, whether the foul ^vere cor pore-* al or no ? Can Atoms frame Syllogifms in 7mod and figure ? and mere matter argue pro and con , whether it be matter or fomething clfe ? What kind of aereal particles were Xhtir fouls compounded of, who firft fan fed themfelves to be immaterial What ftrange agitations oi matter were thofe which firft made men think of an eternal fate ? which thoughts have ever fince ^0 ftuck upon the(e little fpherical bodies, that they could ne- ver yet disburthen themfelves of them : Whence come fuch amaz^ing fears , fuch dreadfull apprehenjions , fuch finking thoughts 0^ Xh€\v future condition in minds that would fain eafe themfelves by belte^ing;^ that death would put a period both to foul and hody ? Whence on the other fide come fuch encour age- ing hopes y fuch confident expe&'ations, fuch comfortable prepoj/ef fions of their future ft ate^ in th.^ fouls of good men, when their bodies Chap. I. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted: 391 hodies are neareft to the grave ? Simcn^ who was fomewhat di4- h'lous fometimes as to the future conditio-n of the [oul^ yet could tell his dear Lucilius with w^hat fleafure he could thmk of it ; and could elfewhere fay of the fcul^ Et hoc hahet argmnentum Pr^f.ad duaji. divmitatis fu^ ^uod i'lum di'vina dtIe^ri7Jt, nee ut ahenis inter- ^^tv.r. eft fed ut fuis : the foul had that 7nark of Divinitj in it^ that it was m'/ft plca,'ed with Di'vinejf^ectdations^ a^zd conuerled 7vith them as with matters which nearly concerned it. And W-hen it hath once 'viewed the dimenfions of the Heavens^ contemf/it do- micilii prior is angufiias, it was alhamcdof the^ro/z^^^it dwelt in; nay, were it not for thcfcf^eculations, non fucrat opera pretium nafct^ it had not been worth while for the foul to have been in the body ; and as he goes on, detrahe hoc meftimahle ho7ium^ ncn eft "uita tanti ut fudem^ ut aftuem. Could there be now {o great an Epicurifm in conten^plation , were the fcul of man of Epicurm his mouldy a mere complexion of Atoms ? would dull and hea'i'j matter ever have delighted to have fe arched '[o much into the caufes of things , to have gone over the world in its fpcculati'^ns^ snd found mortfweetnefm knowledge^ than the little Epicure^ the Bee^ tafts in his choiceft /^/^i^^rj ? Epi- ciirm his own Vhilofophy is a demonftration zgdxn^ himfelf \ if: his foul had not been of a purer nature than he fanfied, he would never have made his ftudy of Philofcphy a part of his Epicurifm ? had his foul been iuch Atoms as he fanfied^ when his brain had been well heated at his fludy^ thofe more ^ivid: and jf/iritimis particks , like the fpirits of wine , had been in dagger of evaporation, and leaving the more lumpijl) matter to complete \v[^work. Of all perfons, I moft admire that Thilo-^ fophers^ who make fo much ufe of their underftandings, fliould io ungratfuUy recjutte them , and ferve them like old horfes , v^hen they have made them doe all the fervice they ccxild . turn them into the mgh-ways ^ and let them die in a dttch. But yet all Fhilofophers have not been lb unthankful!^ fome have underfiood the worth of their foul , and aflertcd it, if they have not ufed too high , i. e. Vlatonical exprejjions of it, making it a parttde-, not of matter, but of the Dii;i;;^ ??^- pure it felf , a little Deity in ^'CoHap, that ftays here a-while, and returns to that \ipper Region from whence it came. As Maviliiis fpeakSj ^91 Or'fgines Sacrce : Book III. iiUnil. I. 4. ^fi Juhtum eft hahttare Deum fuh pe^ore ncftro^ In cxltiwque redire anlmas^ ccelocfue venire ? And while tht foul is here in its ca^e^ it is continually /«//^^r- wg up and down^ and delighteth to look out now at this part^ and then at another , to take a vieiv by degrees of the wbols Univer/cj as the fame Poet goes on, .^id m'trum nofcere mundum Si pojj'unt hommesy cfuthm eft d^ mundus in ipfis : ' Kximplum(]ue Dei ejuifque eft in imagine parva ? The foul hath nothing more delightful! to it than knowledge^ and no knowledge fo pleafing and fattsfaBory as of him whofe image and fuperfcrtption it bears, who makes himfelf moft known to fuch as encfuire after him ; Seque ipfum incnlcat d^ offiirt Ut bene cognofci pojfit. I conclude this with that of Seneca , in that excellent Preface to his natural queftions , O quam contempt a res eft homo nifi fupra humana Je erexerit 1 Tvhat a pitiful! thing is man^ were it not that his foul was apt to foar above thefe earthly things ? And by thisaptnefs to foar fo high above thefe terrene objeBs^ and to converle with fb much freedom with Jhtritual Beings^ as well as abftraUed notions ^ we may certainly inferr that our rational fouls are of a far more noble and refined nature, than ' that more feculent principle of imagination which always con- verfes in face Romuli , and can go no further than our fenfes carry it. And thus I have made good the firft proof, that there is fomething above matter and motion in the world^v^hich is from that immaterial Being which is in man. SeB, 19. The next evidence which we have of a Being above matter 2. and motion^ is, from the extraordinary ejfeBs which have been in nature, I fpeak not now merely of fuch things which by their natures and effcBs are manifefted to proceed from Ibme Beings which bear ill-wtll to mankind , multitudes of which are related by men philojophical and tnquifttive , with fuch enume- Cliap.r. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures offer ted, 3:95 enumerations of circumfiaftces , and particular e'vidences , that they are not mere impojfures , that one may on the fame grounds queftion any mamr oifad which himfelf did not fee, as fuch relations which are delivered by perfons without inte- refi or dejtgn, and fuch as were able to judge of the truth of circumfiances ; fuch are both ancient and modern Philofophers^ Thyjiciansy States mc^.^nd others. Neither (hall I infift on fuch frodigiesj which oft-times prefage revolutions in States^ if we believe Machiavel himfelf, who in a whole chapter delignedly Dif^utJ.i^.$6. 1 proves it ; and profeifeth himfelf utterly to leek for the caufes of | them, unlefs they may be attributed to feme ^irtts and imelit- gences in the air which give the world notice of fuch things to come. But thofe things which I fuppole have the mod: clear and undoubted evidence of true and undoubted miracles ( the matters o{ faEi being affirmed by eye-witnej]es^ who fealed the truth of them with their lives ) are thofe recorded in the ho- ly Scriptures; which there are only two ways to evade, either by queftrtoning the truth of the things , which 1 fuppofe in the precedent book we have proved with as much rational evi- dence as any thing of that nature is capable of, or elle that the things therein recorded might be falved without a Deny. For which only two ways have been excogitated by Atheifttcal J^i- rits, either attributing them to the po7ver and influence oi the Stars^ thQ foundations of which fond and abfurd opinion have been taken away by thofe many Writers , who have rationally p-^ r>, h. Mare's confuted the whole Art of Judicial A fir ology, or elfe that they Myftery of are done by the mere power of imagination^ which is the way Godlinefs, /.y. of Avicenna and fome other Arabick Writers, which is fo ^•'4»J5>i^ji7' wild an effed of the power of imagination^ that nothing doth fo much demonftrate the irregular motions of it , as fuch an opinion doth ; and is fufficiently derided and refuted by Fom- pnatim himfelf. Now then, it being an acknowledged principle in nature , that every thing continues in the courfe it js in , till fomething more power full put it out , if then fuch things have been in the world, which have been real alterations of the courje of fjciturey as the Suns fand'm^ fill in the time of Jofhua, then there muft be fomethin?^ abov^e matter zxA moti- cn^ and confequcntly that the .c is a Qod. E e e G H A R ' 394 Ofigines Sacral : Book lit CHAP. 11. Of the Origin of the Univerfe. The necejjlty of the belief of the Creation of the world in order to the truth of Religion, Of the feveral Hjpothefes of the Fhilofophers who contradi5i Mofes : with a particular ex- amination of them. The ancient tradition of the world con- fonant to MofeS; proved from the lonick Philofophj of Tha- les, and the Italick of Pythagoras. The Pjthagorick Cab- bala rather zy^gyptian than Mofaick. Of the fluid matter^ which was the material principle of the tiniverfe. Of the Hypothefis of the eternity of the world ajferted by Ocellus Lucanus and Ariftotle. The weaknef of the foundations on which that opinion is built. Of the manner of forming prin- ciples (f Fhilofophy, The pofftbility of creation proved. No arguing from the prefent fiate of the world againft its begin- Tiingy jhewed from Maimonldes. The Vlatonifis arguments from the goodnej^ of God for the eternity of the world, an- fwered. Of the Stoical Hypothefis of the eternity of matter ; whether reconcilable with the Text of Mofcs. Of the Opini- ons of Plato and Pythagoras concerning the pne-exijience of matter to the formation of the world. The contradiBion of the eternity of matter to the nature and attributes of God. Of the Atomical Hypothefis of the Origin of the Univerfe, The world could not be produced by a cajual concourfe of Atoms proved^ from the nature and motion of Epicurus hts Atoms , and the Thanomena of the Univerfe , ejpecially the produSlion and nature of Animals. Of the Cartefian Hypo- thefis, that it cannot falve the Origin of the Univerfe with- out a Deity giving wot ion to matter, SeB. I. 'TpH E Foundations of Religion being thus eftabliflied in the X Being of God, and the Immortality of the Soul, we now come to ereorld was no matter of dijpute, but,, taking that for granted, the emfuiry was, out of what material Principle the Univerfe was formed ; of which Thales thus delivers his I>e Nat. Dew. opinion in TuUy ; aquam dixit effe intttum rerurn, Deurn autem /. I. ca^. 25. ^^YYi menttm cjua ex aqua cuntt a finger et ; wherein he plainly diftinguiflieth the efficient from thQ- material caufe of the world. The primQ efficient W^S God , the material principle y water. It is a matter of fome encjuiry, whether the firfi priit^ \ cities of Philofophy among the Greeks were not rather fome traditional things conveyed to them from others , than any certain Tl^^^r if; which they had formed from their own experi- ments and obfervations. The former is to me far the more pro- bable on many accounts , but chiefly on this, that tht firfi prin- ciples of the two Founders of the chid jetU of Fhilojophers ^ VIZ,, the lonick and Italtck (for ail the other were but the va- li noixs ij/uei of theft two) did come fo near to that which we have: Cha{^.i. the Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajjerted, 397 have the greateft reafon to believe to have been the nioft certain account of the origin of the ivorld. For this opinon of Thales feems to have been part of that unizferjal tradition which was continued in the world concerning the/r// principles of things: for I do not (ee any reafon to averr with fo much confidence, as fome doe, that thofe Phtlojophers who fpake any thing con- fonantly to Mojes^ muft prefently converfe with the Jell's, tran- fcribe their opinions out of the Scriptures^ or have them con- veyed to them in fome lecret Cabbala of the Creation^ as it is affirmed ofFythagoras and Plato^ and may with no le(s reafon - of thales. But this I fuppofe may be made evident to any Gonfiderative per [on , that thofe Fhtlofcphers of Greece , who converfed moft abroad in the vjorld^ did J}eak far more agree- ably to the true account of things, than fuch who only endea- voured by their own jvits to improve or correB thofe princi- ples which were delivered by the other Philofophers, Which i impute not Hd much to their converfe with the Mofatck writings^ as to that univerfal tradition of the firft ages of the 7Porld^ which was preferved far better among the Phoenicians^ Egyptians, Chaldeans, and others, than among the Greeks. For which we have this evident reafon, that Greece was far more barbarous and rude in its elder times , than thofe other Nations were, which had means of preferving fome monw rmnts and general reports of the firft ages of the world, when the Grecians wanted them. And therefore we find that Greece from its beginning fhined with a bovvoWQd light ; and faw not by an extramijjion of rays of knowledge from it felf , but by an imrowij/ion of thole reprefentations of things which were received from other Nations, Thofe who formed Greece firft into civil focieties , and licked it into the {hape of well or- dered Common-wealths , were fuch who had been traders for kmwltdze into foreign parts. To which purpofe Dtodorus Si- cuUis informs us that Lycurgus and Solon, as well as the Po- tts, Orpheus, Muf^eus, Melampus and Homer, and the Philo- BibUoth. L r; fophers, afterwards Pythagoras, YhtO^and others, had gained ^ ^^jf- ^^'^P' moft of their knowledge and wifdom out of iEgypt ; nay, he ^ ' faith in general, o^vt <^J ^^tf' saawt? AJh^ctj/^eov ^ cvvi^rn k) Tfity^ yoixifMov ;y etiS'iieti ^i\ct^(nv. All thofe who Were renown- id among the Greeks for wifdom and learning , did in ancient time. 398 DJog. Laerf. .proeem. p. J. i^. Selden. de jure nat.^gen' apiid EbraoSy I. I. C.2. Voff. de SeBts Philof&ph. c. 6 feci. 5. Origines Sacra : Book III. time re fort to iEgypt , to he acquainted vj'tth their Laws and knowledge. On this account therefore we are not to feek for the ancient and genuine tradition of thcworld from the nati've and home-bred Greeks , fuch as Ariftotle and Epicurus , but from thofe who took the paws themfelves to fearch into thofe records which were preferved among the elder and more know- ing Nations : And although the Nations they reforted to , fought to advance their own reputation in the htfiories of their ancient times, of which we have already given a large account, yet they were more faithful I in the account which they gave of the origin of the whole Univerfe. For it appears from Diogenes Laertufs, that the t^gyptians did conftantly believe, that the world had a beginning , and was corruptible ; that tt was a fph^rical, and the fiars ivere of the nature of fre ; that the foul woi tf an immortal nature, and did faj^ up and down the world. Which Laertim cites from Hecatam and Anfiagoras. So that we need not make Tytbagoras acquaint- ed with fuch a Cabbala of the Creation , which in ail proba- bility neither the Jews nor he ever dreamt of; we. find a fair account may be given of moft of the opinions of Pythagoras , and whence he derived them , without forcing the words of Mofes into fuch a fence , which the platmiefi and perjpicuity of the writings of Mofes, argue them not capable to admit of. But I will not deny from thofe concurrent teflimonies of Her- mtppm and Arifiobulm, befides Origen, Torphyrie, Clemens A- lexandrinus, and others, that Pythagoras might have had op- portunity of converfing with the Je7ps, (which it is moft pro- bable was in Chaldaa, after the Captivity, at which time Py- thagoras was there among them ) but that Pythagorm ihould converle with the fucceflbrs of Eli^a on mount Carmd , as Voffius thinks ; or that Mofchus the Sidoman Philofopher, in - lamhltchus, lliould be Mofes, as others fanfic ; or that pra- exiftence oi fouls fliould be part of the Mofaick Cabbala ; or that the Pythagorick numbers , as they are explained by Ni- comachus Gerafenus in Photius , (liould be adiecjuate to the days of the Creation Cabbahftically underftood , are fancies too extravagant and Pythagorean, to be eafily embraced. If Py- thagoras was circutnctfed , it was more for love of the ^y^gy- ptians than the Jews, among whom he fpent his twenty two years ; \i pr^txijhnce oi fouls be a rational hypothefis^ we may thank chap. X. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted, 'i^()(^ thank the i/E.gy^ttans for it, and not Mofes ; if numbers be (b expreffive of the work of Creation^ we are beholding to the y^- rkhmetkal Hieroglyphic ks 0^ . 1047.^^.77"- alcribed the production of the Ji'orld to the goodnef of God , cini. ^\i\Qh goodnef oi his did incline him to make all other things like himielf Qifju^ «r' iZ «^t' ^ TrrT dei'^a J^^v ctAAo 'TThiuj TO ^^KKis^v^ For the moft excellent being cannot but produce the • mofi excellent ejfecis. ,And as to the material principle out of which the vjorld was made, there appears no great df- /ere»ce between the vJ^^ oi Thales, and the jAJt of Plato and. 400 Origines Sacra : Book III. and Pythagorus ; for FUto , when he tells us what a kind of thing the material principle was , he defcribes it thus , vk «- Chalcia. Tim^. wv-^av a.y)v dhha. tuvis^oy ^A«^/^t€A«^ xj tf7ttx.74- Which is the fame likewife with the Phoenicians Mar , which Eufek Pmp. £- as appears by Eufebim, Ibme call 'i^w, others jA^tTwcTaf /Jfsr.'tf ♦f^w^. /.i.f.io. (7^-4^1/, fome, mud or yZiw^, others, the putrefaBion of watery mixtures^ which they fay was, '^'tto^. KJia^a^ ty ^Vsc-/? ou^Vi the feed-plot of the Creation and the generation of things. Thus we fee how Thales with the Phoenicians from whom he was deri- ved, as Laertim tells us and Pythagoras^ with the <»y£g)'ptians and others, concurr with Mofes ^ not OTily in th^produttion of the world , but in the manner of it , wherein is exprefled a fluid matter which was the material principle out of which Gen. I. 2. the world was formed^ when we are told that ^y&^ f^rf^ was withiyut form and 'void ^ and the Spirit if God moved upon the face of the waters^ /, e. that all at firft was but fl^id r?atter ; for P. Fagu/s, from R.Kimchi, renders ^nl^ by uA», which /«- td matter was agitated and moved by the Divine Spirit^ or the •z;// pla/tica Trundi , ib Chryfofiom calls it IvifynA ^efj^Kn ' and • lb Druflm and P. Ka^iiJ/if explain ^ini by w^r;<7« or agita- tion. And herein we have likewiie the confcuL of thofe fore- named exieflcra Fhilofophers , who attribute the origin of particular thwgs in the world to this agitation or motion of the Chap.i. TBe Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferteJ. /\ o r the fluid mauer. For Chalcidtm fpeaking not only of Thaks^ Qhdcidjimm. TythagGraSy VlatOyhvXO^ Anaximsnes^ Heraclitm^ and Others, ?• 378» lays thus of them, omms igttur hi — in mot a ^o fit am rerum ort- gwsm cenjuerunt : they all agrsed in this^ that the Origin of things ')vas to hz ascribed to the motion of the farts of matter. So the Ph-znicians called this motion of the particles of matter Aifd (opacN xj 'TTviv^sLTciJ^ a dark and hluflering wind, h nd how fuitable this explication of the Orio-in of things from the motion of fltud matter is to the hiftory of nature^ appears by thole many experiments by which mixt bodies are (hewed to fpring from no other material principle than the particles of fluid matter. Of which yoti may read a difcourfc of that in- genioris and learned Gentleman Mr. Boyle in hW Sceptical Chy- Sceptical Chy- mifi. Only thus much may here luffice to have made it ap- rnij},p.iis. S^c. pear^ that all thofe Philofophers^ who were mcfl in^mfitive af- ter the ancient and genuine tradition of the ivorld concerning th^flrft- beginning of things^ did not only concur with Mofes in the main thing, that its beginning was from GoJ, but in the particular circumflances of it, as to the fluid matter and the motion thereof. Concerning which I may yet add, if it be material, the Tefiimonj of Homer in Plutarch. And in Chalcidias : Inque eadem fententia Homerus ejje inzre- odyf. k. nitur^ cum Oceanum d^ Thetin die at parentes ejj'e genitura-y cumquejusjurandum Deorum conflituat a^uam^ quam cfuidem ^l^^lcid.p. I'jB, ipje appellat Stygem^ antiquitati tribuens reverentiam^ S" jure^^^^^^f '"• jurando nihil conflituens reverentius. To which purpofe like- ^ ' ^' ^^' wife Ariftotle fpeaks in his Metaphyficksy that the reafon why ^gfaphyf, I i . Styx was made the oath of the Gods, was becaufe ivater was ^.3. fuppofed to be the material principle of things^ which he faith was eif^iet 77? etvTV )y '^Aha.iA iff^ei '^ (pvaie,)^ J^^ct, a mofi an- cient tradition concerning tht Origin of the Univerfe., And tells us before, that fbme were of opinion, t«? ^A^^ctAflt/y?, )^ woaJ "^e) T?^ vi^v yivia^a^ :^ -wf aVa? 3?oAs^«<7aj/Ta?, that the mofi anci- ent and remote perfons and firfi writers of Theology held this opinion of water being the fir fl material principle of things. Fff Having ^o^ Origines Sacral : Book III. Se.tr, 4. Having thus made it appear what aconfent there was be- tween the ancient tradition of the world, and the 'writtTigs of ''Adofes concerning the Origin of the 'world \ I now come to confider upon what fretaue of reafon this tradition came to be contradicled^^nd the eternity ofthe x?/or/i alTerted.For which we are to confider, that the difference of the former Fhilojopkrs of the lonick feB, after the time of Thales, as to ih^ material principle of the world^ouQ ftibfiitutrng air, another /r^ inflead of 'water, rendred the tradition its felf fufpetted among other Thilofophers, efpecially when the humour oi innovating in Pht- lofophy was got among them, and they thought they did no- thing unlefs they ccntradicled their Ma(lers ; thence came that r/mltiplicitj of SeBs prefentlv among them, and that Pbi- lofophy which at firft went much on the original tradition of the world, was turned into dtjputes and altercations, which helped as much to the finding out of Truth, as th^fghting of two Cocks_ on a dung-hill doth to the findwg out the Jewel that Hes there. For which, [craping and fearching into the natures of things had been far more proper, than contentions and wr anglings with each other ; but by means of this //>/- ^/c-'^/j humour^ Philofophy from being a dejign^ grew to be a mere Art, and he was accounted the bed Philofcpher, not that learched further into the bowels of nature, but that drejjed and tricked up the notions he had in the beft poflure of defence againft all who came to oppofe him. From hence thofe opi- nions were moft planjible, not which were mod true, but which were moft defenfible, and which Des-Cartes hhfecond element, •had all the Angles cut off, on which their adv'er fanes miight have an advantage of jufiling upon them, and then their oft- nions were accounted moft pure when they are h ^b^rical, as to pafs up and down without interruption. From fuch ^de- generacy of Philofophy as this we have now mentioned, arofe tht opinion of the eternity of the world , for the certain tra- ydition of the world being now lofi in a rro^i^^ of Phtlof'o.phers^ whofe main ^/>;; was to fet up for themfelves, and not to trade with the commcn-hank , fo that there could be no certain and conviBive evidence given to "AJhuffiing Philofcpher that things were, ever otherwife than they are ; they found it moft deftn^ fible to affcrt that the^^tfr/^/ never had a beginning, nor would •hcavean. f?;^/, but always ^/r/, and would conitnyie in the 67^^^ they,. chap. 1. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajfertecf, 405 they were in This opinion, though Anfiotle feems to make all before him to be of another mind, yet was hatched^ as far as we can find, at firft, under Pythagoras his fucceflbrs by Ocel- liis Lucanus^ as appears by his ^oo^ dill extant, -o-el w t^ tai- TO? (pv(7ia^of the nature of the Univerfe ; to whom Arifiotle hath not been a little beholding, as Ltuh'v. Nogarola hath - in part manifefted in his notes on Ocellus, although Anfiotle had not the ingenuity of Vliny, agnofcere per tjuos- vrofecent. From Arifiotle this opinion together with his nam.e, fpread ^'■' it felf much farther, and became the cpmon moft in x^cgue among the Heathen Vhilofofhers^ efpecially after the rife cf Chrtfi vanity ; for then not only the Penpateticks^ but the modern Piatonifl's, Vlotinus^ Afuleius^ T'aurus^ J a-mhlichus ^ AlcinoHs, Vroclus and Others, were all engaged in the defence of the eternity of the world, thinking thereby the better to overthrow Chrifiiamty. Hence came the hot and eager con- tefis between'P^-cc/^i, Stmfltctus, and Philoponus, who under- took to anfwer Proclus his eighteen arguments for the eternity of the world, and to charge Arifiotle with felfcontradidion in reference to it. But nothing w'ere they more troubled a- bout, than to reconcile the J'tm^us of Plato with the eternity of i\\t world, which they made to be a mere HypotheJIs, and a kind of Diagramme to falve providence withal ; although the plain words of Plato not only there, but ekewhere do ex- prefs, as far as we can judge by his way of writing, his real judgment to have been for the produBiop of the world by God. pr^f^.^ sothiFT For which purpofe we have this obfervable Teftimony in ^\i -hfi^iEd.Fii Sophifia, where he divides all manner of produBions of things into divine and humane, and oppoles the opinion that conceived all things to be produced by an eternal power, to the opinion of the vulgar, which faith he, was rh- (pvjtv ay-rvi i^/jvlv dm) TJvcg euirct^ avT^/ucl:}'^ io^AViv i iJ^ Tni^^^ dyayKAiAf \7nyji^^(0^ F f f 2 TTQliiv 404 Origines Sacr^ : Book IIP fjr^iCiv luihoyfiv. He would undertake to make him ccnfef^ the contrary by the evidence of reafon which he would bring. And we fhallfee wnat great reafon there is for this opinion, when we confider what weak and infirm foundations theco«- trary is built upon. For all the arguments which either O^f/- /«j,or Jrifiotle^oY the modi^vn VI at omfis make ufe of,are built on thefe foWowingfuppo fit ions which are all falfc. i. That it ■ IS unconcefvabU that things jhould ever have been tn any other fiate than they are, l.That there is no other way (f froduclion but by Generation. ^. That God is no free agent, but prodn-r ceth the 7vorld by nee e fit y of 7tatur^, Se^, f . I . That it is unconceivable that things (hould ever have been any otherwife than they are. The reafon of which /«^;>^//r/c« was this, that the general conclufions of reafon^ which they pro- ceed upon in Fhilofophy J were taken up from the obfervation of thmgs as they are at preient in the world. Which is evident from the ground of AnftotW^ condemning the ofimon of Em- pedoclesj who aflerted the produBion of the world, and yet the incorruptibility of it, ro ^^o «^ yivi^t jui^v, aiJ^iov v<17wv, which he accounts impojpble and gives this as his reafon, {juova ><) tovt* ^jiov iv\6ya;, cm It/ Tnhhav >J ^ijldectelo. ^fl^ov o^afj^^J y^d^^vTA. For, faith ht, nothing elfe can be ya- ' ' ^' tionally aferted, but what we find to be in all things or at leaf in moft\ now becaule there could nothing be found in the- world which was produced (i. e. by generation^ and yet was incorruptible, therefore he concludes it impoffible it lliould be lb with the Univerfe, By which we evidently fee what the grand principles o( reafon among tht.Fhilo fop hers were ; viz^, fuch obfer vat ions as they had made from the prefent courfe of nature in the order of the Univerfe. From hence arofe that ftropg prefumption among them, which hath been fo taken for granted, that it hath been looked on as a common noticn. V. Later. in njit. of humane nature. y'lz, ex nihilo nihil fit, 'which was the main ar- Democriti. gumcnt ufed by them to prove the eternity of the world : .and by others to prove tht pr a- ex ffi-cme of matter. So Ocellm argues againft both th^.difolutionzrlpycoclEtton of the world from this principle; if the worldhc fi' ffblvcaJaith he, it mufi either be wV/ fiV TO "ovj M eif TO fjL^ av, ether vr-: that which is , or i^ito that which is not ; it cannot be difc ved into that which is,be- caufe then^the Univerfe ca?wot he deftroyed -, for that which is.,. is.. ehap.x. the Divine Authority of the Scriptures^ aferted. 405* is either the Untverfe^ or a part of it : neither can it be diJjoU 'ue^tnto that luhich is not^ aijm^vov -yb tI 'ov ^jTmi^i^t ottr^ i^ti hlioy^t) ^f 'li^i^op elmwQhau.For it ii impojjible that a thing jhould Ocellus Lmanw be made out of that which is not^or bedijjol'ved into nothing. And ^' '"• ' ''^"' Ariftotle fomewhere tells us,that it is a principle which all the ^^ * writers of natural Vhilofophy are agreed in, ('S^set >^ ra-vivi o^uq- phyfic, I 4. yvafjUiv^cn 77)i Jo^nf (I'TTcLVTii ol ^^siex '^ (pvinct)!;) which is l^rc t^\^ oviztt^ -iiVi^cu AjX/vctviVt that tt is imfojfihle for any thing to come out of nothing. But HOW when we oblerve upon what grounds this principle was took up by thefe Pbilofophers^ we have no reafon to admit of it as an Univerfal/^w^^^ri of nature. For we find by thefe Naturalifis, who thus afeted this principle, that when they go about to prove it, it is only from the courfe of Generations in the world, or from the ivorks of Arty both which fuppole matter pra extfienty and from thele fliort coU letJions they form this uni'verfal Maxim. And from hence Qe Nat: I i when they difcourfed of the manner whereby God did produce the world, their imaginations raa prefently upon that which- the Epicurean in lully enquires after, qu^'molitio ^ qua ferra-* menta ? qui 'veBes f qu^ machines I qui miniftri tanti opens fue- runt ? they apprehend God only as an Artificer that contrives the World firft into a platform, and then ufeth inftruments to ered it^ and confequently ftill fuppoie the maiter ready for him to work upon. So true is that of Balbus in Tully whett £)^ ^v^^^ u^^,-^ he comes to difcourfe of the nature of God ; tn quo nihil efi l.i. diffcilius quam a con fuel udjne oculorum aciem mentis abducere i nothing is more dijjicult than to abfira^ our minds from the eb^ fer'vations of this vijible world when we feek' to apprehend the Nature of the Deity. Thus we fee upon what general grounds the Vhilofophers proceeded, and from what they took them, and how infuffiaent any coUeHions from the prefent order of the Umverfe are to determine any thing concerning its pro- dudion by. For {M'^'^o\\Xi%^produBion of the world, feveral things mufl: of neceffity be fuppofed in it, different from' what die prefent order of the- world is ; and it is an unreafonable thing to argue from a -thing when it is in its greated perfe- clion, to what mufl always have been in the fame thing; for by thxs means we mud condemn many things for falji tic f which are apparently true, and heiieve many others to be true \s\]\q\i are apparently fall'e. For which AiaimonuUs u(eth . aacvcellentiimilitude. Suppofe, faitti he, one of Kxquifite Na- tura- 4o6 Origines Sacm : Book III, Mm-e Kevoch. tHral parts ^ vjhoje Mother dies aJJ'oon be is horn^ and his Father p. 2. c. I J. brings him up in an IJland^ where he may have no fociety with mankind till he he grown up to years of under llandtn^^ and that he ne'ver [aw any female of either man er beafi : Suppofe now this per f on to enquire of the fir fi man he fpsaks with, how men are born^ and how they come into the world. The other tells him , that every man is bred in the womb of one of the fame kind with our jelves, thus and thm formed ; and that while we are in the 7Pomb we have a very little body^ and there move and are nourtjhed^ and we grow up by little and little till we come to fuch abignefs, and then we come forth into, the world^^nd yet grow fiill till we come to fuch a pro- iportion as ws are of. Here prefently this young man flops him and ent^uires^ when we were thus little in the womb and did live, move and grow, did 7ve not eat and drink^ and breath at our mouth and noflrils as we do now ? did we not eafe Na~ thre as we do now ? If it be anjivered him^ no ^ then he pre- fently is ready to deny it, and offers to bring demonfirations •that u was utterly impojfible thatit jhottld be Jo: For, faith he, if either of us ceafe breathing, but for an hour, our motion and life is gone \ how is it then pojfible for one of us though never fo little, to live and move in the womb for fo many 7nonths,when it is fo clofe, and jhut up, and in the middle of the body ^ If one of us, {d.ithhQ,JhouId /wallow a little bird, it would pre- fently die as foon as it came into the ftomach, how much more ■if it 7vere in the belly ? If we Jhould be but for fews days without eating and drinking, we could not live ? bo7u can a Child then continue fo many fponths without it ? Jf^ain, if one doth eat and not void the excrement of 7vhat he eats, he7vili be killed 7vith it in few days ; ho7V can it pojjibly be otheromfe 7i^ith a Child ? Ifh be replyed that there is apaJJ'age op^n in the belly at which the child receives his nourishment, he will prefently fay that it is as impoffible as the othef', for if our bellies were fo open, 7i^e Jhould be quickly defireyed. And again, if the child hath all its limbs perfect and found, ho7U comes it not to open its eyes, ufe the feet, mouth and hands^ as we da ? And jo con- cludes it impojjible that man Jhould ever be born after this man- ner. Much after this way, faith that excellent Author, do Ariftotle and others argue againft the produttion of the 7i>orld ; for if the world were produced, fay they, it muft have been th us. Chap. X. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted, 407 thus, and thus, and it is imfojjlijh that it (liould have been fo; why ? bccauie we fee things are otherwife now in the -ivorld. Which how infirm a way otargum^, it appears from the con- llderation of the former fimtlitfJe, in which the Arguments are as jirong to prove the imfojjibility of that which we know to be true, as in the cafe about which we difpute. And this now leads us to the fecond fdje Hypothefis \vhich ^^^ ^. the oftnion of the world's eternity was founded on, which is, ' ^ that there is no other way of produSlion h^it by Generation, Mod of the arguments which are ufed by Ocellus and Arifiotle againft the prcduBion of the world, run upon this fuppofition, that it muft be generated as we fee things are in the world. So Ocellus argues^ '^civ n to ytHc^cae d^^v i)\M^'o^, )Lj ^'i\^^i, J)jo ^Si;),ff) uiTACoKeii' uidj/ wV T'Loo ah^jjA'^' 'verf.^. 8. 9^e^' <^ c/^/AAvc77f. Every thing that comes into being and is fub- je5^ to dif/olutlon, hath two obferi/able mttpattpm m it ; the one is, vph^reby it grows from IcJ^ td- great eff and from oi^orfe to better, and this' ts eaUeel Generati*hf'; and the height of this mu' ration, perfeBioh ', the other begins from better to l^orfe, and from bigger to tefs, and the concliffion of this is corruption, and diffolution. ' 'But now, faith he, if .the world had a beginnings there ii>ju}dbe fuch or mutation in it^andit would have grown b)- degrees greater till' it hadeome to its perfeBion, and from thence it would fenjthly decay till it came to diffolution •, but no body hath ever cbferved fich a mutatiofi in the world, ?jeither is there any appearance of it \ o.kk au k^' cLuto )y ucmviws JliATi^ei yfj iozi? ;i€s Sacns : Book III. not capable ot generation and corruptioji as other boJjes are. All whicii Arguments fignifie no more than this, that the Wnrld v/as not generated as Vlants or Animals are; and whoever right in his wns aiTerted that it was > But do any of thefe Arguments prove it impoflible that God having infi- nite power fliould produce the Umverfe after another vjay, than any of thofe things are produced in, which we oblerve in the World ? For we aflert an infinite and eternal Being which was the efficient caufe of the world ^ who by his omnipotent power produced it out of nothings and continues it in its Be- ing ; which is well exprefled by the Author of the refuta- ^rijiot.dognjnt. ^^^" ^^ Ariflctk in Jufitn Martyrs Works. We ajjert^ faith evirf.^, MI. he, one God who is eternal himfelf^ that hath nothing elfe cc- ■ eijual with himfelf^ neither by way of fubjection or oppofition^ whofe power ts fo great that nothing can hinder ity by which power he produced the world y a^')^v i^v]o^ -rJi '^, ^ t« 77 e^/, ;^ t« mii J)Aju^m, rluj z^im ^hn^iv ; which hath no other caufe, ei- ther of its beginning, or of its being, or continuance, but only his Will, Who fully anfwers in a Philofophical manner, the particular Allegations out of Arifiotle , concerning the e- ternity of the World : his defign being, as he faith, to fliew fJWi Xj* Tf/jJ CUTIS AiKJiKfiv ^gviiUA^VjX^B' nv k'^etyyiwoy'j '^B^^i^Hf 'O-ffi siKec(r/xM TO JhK^v J^ioeA. ^123. rily exijrent as himjetf, be may produce jomethmg out of no- thing. For the fame repugnancy that there is in that which is abjolutely nothing to be produced, the fame mufi there be m that which is neceffanly exijhnt. How then can God produce fbme- thing out of matter which neceffarily exiflsy and not be able to produce fomething out of nothing ? For if matter have its Which is a far greater ahfurdtty than the mere ajj'er- ting a power to y^xoawQ^fomethingoVit oi nothing, which is im- ;plyed in the .very notion of infinite power ; for if it be confi- ned to any matter , the power is not infinite , becaufe we can- not but conceive tlie bounds of it ; for it extends no farther than matter doth. So that a power of creation is implyed in the very Notion of a Deity ; and therefore it is a mere Sophifm to argue becaufe the vjorUl could not be generated^ therefore it could not be produced , unlefs any other way of produ^ion but by generation^ be proved tmpojfible. A third falfe Hjpothefis they proceeded on was this , that SefL 7. the Being of the world was no effe^ of God's will ^ hut of the 2. neceffity of Nature, For although the Fhilofophers we now fpeak of , did aifert a Deity , which in Ibme fence might be called the caufe of the world, yet they withall aiierted that the world was co-ecjual with God himfelf, and lb though there might be fbme priority in order of caufes between them , yet there was none in order of time , or duration , as we fee the light , though it flows from the Sun , yet the Sun is never without %i?f. This Jrifiotle proves from the neceffity of mo- tion and time : For, faith he, wh-itever ts moved, mu(i^ be mo^ vedby fomething elfe ^ and confecfuently there mufl be a run- ning in Infinitum \ but this runs on a falfe fuppofition of the neceffity of a continual phyfical motion in things, which we de- ny, (ince God by his infinite power may give motion to that which had it not before •, and fo ail that can be proved, is the neceffity of fome firft caufe^ which we allert, but no neceffity at all of his continual aBing, fince he may caufe motion when he pleale. And for time continually exifting , it denotes nothing real in it felf exifiting , but only our manner of concepti- on , of the duration of things , as it is conceived to belong to motion ; and fo can argue nothing as to the real ey:ifi:enceoi things from all eternity. But the latter Vlatomfis look upon -theie asinfufficient ways approbation^ and therefore argue from ■ G g g thofe *t fio Origines S-acra: : Book HI. thofe aiirihutes of God^ which they "Conceive moft vecejjary and agreeable to GtJ^'s Nature ; and by which the 7//r:r/^ was f reduced if at all : fo that by the fame (Arguments whereby we prove that the world was -rnade by Gid^ they prove it to have been from dMcterjuty. It was well and truly faid o(FIatOj in his Tirfiatts^ that the Gocd^uj^ cf dd was the caufe cf the prcdt cih on of the world \ from which fpeec'^. the more modern Plr.to^ r/ifis gather a tjccejfity of tlie world's eternity , for from hence they inferr , that (ince God was alwa_ : -locd^ he muft ahva\s have an chjecl to exercile his goodnejd upon ; as the Sun di^- perfetb bis light as focn as he :s btmjelf. True, were God of the nature of the Sun^ it would be fo with him ; or were the 5//?; of the Nature of God^ it would not be fo with it. But there is this vaft difference between them , that though Gcd be ejjenti- ally and necejTaril) good ^ yet the cc?nmunicatkns oi x!n\% good- ntj^ are the etFect of his will , and not merely of his nature ; For, Vv'ere not the afts of hnefice^jce and goodmjs in God the free acls of his will , man muft be made as h::^fy as he was ccifahle of being, not only upon his firft exiilt-rKe in the world^ but as long as it lliould continue , by m.ere neceffity of nature^ without any in-erz^enricn of the 7i^ill or aci:^ns of men. And lb there could be no fach difference as that of good ^nd had men in the world; for, if the lettmgs forth of God's gocdnefs to the world ht fo necejj'ary, all men muii become necejjanly good, if God^s goodnefi be fo great as to be able to make men fo; which I fuppofe will not be queftioned. By this then we fee that the communications of God's goodnef to the world are free , and depend upon the eternal counfels of his wiU , \vhich is a depth too great for us to approach, or look into ; by what neceffity then, if God be a free Jgenty and of infinite vpfdcm^ as well ^s goodnef, muft we either allert the eternity of the vjorld, or fear to deprive God of his ejfential gcodnef? Whereas to make the ccmmumcaticns of Gcd's gcodnef ad extra necejjary , and therefore to m.ake the worli from eternity^ that he might have an objeB to exercile his goodnefs on, is, to take as much off from the infinite perfeBion and felf-fufficiency of the di-vine nature as it would feem to flatter his goodneS. For God can- not be himfelf without his goodnef; and if his gcodnef cannot be without fome creature to fliew or d:Jf)lay it upon, God can- not be ^erfici nor hapfy^ without his creatures, becaufe thefe are Chap. 1. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures afferted, 411 2iXtnecefjary ijpues o( h\S goodnefi y and confequently we make the Bemg of t\\^\cr eat ares neceflary to his being God. W hich is the higheft derogation from the ahfclute pr feci ion 0^t\\tDivim Nature. We aifert then fo much goodnejl in God, as none can be imagined greater, we affert, that it was the communication of this Di^Jtne goodned which gave being to the -world-., but with- all we acknowledge God to be an Agent infinitely omfe and free, who difpenfeth this ^(?o^»e/jf of his in fuch a way and manner as b beft pleafing to himfelf, though ever agreeable to his Nature. As God is infinitely good in himfelf, fo whatever he doth is fuitable to this nature of his ; but the particular de- terminations of the a^s of God's beneficence belong to the 'ivill of God^ as he is a moft free and independent Agent ; fo that goodnejl as it imports the nccelfary retlitude of the diijine na- ture, implies a perfeBion infeparable from the true Idea of God ; but as it is taken for the exprefions of diz/ine bounty to Ibme- what without, as the objed of it, it is not implied in' our con- ceftion of God, as to his nature, but belongs to the free deter- minations of his will. We cannot then, neither ought we to determine any thing concerning the particular -ways of Go A bounty towards the whole Univerfe-, or any part of it , any farther than God himfelf hath declared it to us. Now we fee the world exifts, we have caufe to adore that goodnef. of God, which not only gave a being to the Univerfe, but continually upholds it, and plentifully provides for all the Creatures v/hich he hath made in it. Which the Heathen was fo fenfible of, that the Stoick in TuU)i taking notice of the abundant proviji- Be Nat. Dear, on which is made in the 7i>orld, not only for mans veceffity , ^- 2- but for delight ^nd ornament, cries out, ut inter dum Vron(sa ncflra Eficurea ejfe videatur : God's fronjidence doth abundant- ly exceed man s neceffity. We fee then from this Difcourfe , how unfafe and unjattsfaBory ( that I may not fay bold and frefumptuoiis ) thofe arguments are , which are drawn from a " general confederation of the divine nature and goodnefi , with- out regard had to the determinations of his 7vill , as to the ex- ijience of things in the world. It cannot certainly then be an argument of any great force with any candid Enojuirers after truth and reafon, which hath been lately pleaded in the behalf of that Tythagorean hypothe/is of the fra-exifience of fouls j viz. That if it be good for mens fouls to be at all , thz fooner Ggg 2 they 4 LI Origines Sacnt : Book III. thty are^ the better ; hut vje are moft hnain that the Wifdoin ■ avd. Goohnejl of God "wjU doe that n-hkh is hefi ; and therefore if they can enjoy themjtlves before they come into thefe terrefiri- al bodies (it being better for them to enjoy themfel'ves than not) they mufi be before they come into theje bodies. Wherefore the fra-exifitKce of jiuls ts a necefjary refult of the Wifdcm aj^d Goodnef^ of God , n>ho can no more jail to doe that which h. befl^ than he can to underfiand it. 1 now lerioufly enquire of fuch who love reafcn above Plato and Fythagora-s , whether if the eternity of the world were put into the argument inftead of the fra-extjience oi fouls , this ari^ument WOUJd not hold as firongly for that, as it doth for pr^exifence ; and if I am bound to beheve fra-exijhnce on this ground, I be not hke- wife bound to believe at leaft \h^ jctds oi men eternal ^ if not the umverje. But how reconcilable the eternity of the vwrld is to the Pythagoritk Cabbala of the Creation^ I am yet to un- derdand. But if this argument doth not at all inferr the eter- miy of the -world , as we have (liewed it doth not , much lefs doth it ^ra-exiflence of fouls, SeB. 8. We have thus far confidered the ^r/ H;';)of ^c^^j , which is repugnant to Mofes, concerning the origin of the Univerfe^ which is that which alTerts the eternity of the world as it is \ we come now to the fecond , which attributes the formation of the world z.^ it is, to God, as the efficient caufe-, but attri- butes eternity to the matter out of which the world was fra- med. I am not ignorant that fome who would be taken for the [| . Af^/^r J of i^e^/c^ , are fo far from conceiving this ^7/?of/jf/7i to be repugnant to the Text of Mofes^ that they conceive it Falkelius de to be the genuine fence of it, ^i'x^. that there w^as a fra-exiftent 'vtrard.li.c.^. ^^^^^^ ^ ^y^. ^f which God formed the world. But I would willingly underftand how Mofes would have exprefied that r/iatter it felf was created^ fuppofing it had been his intention to have fpoken it ; for although the word K^Q may not of it felf imply necelTarily the froduEHon of things out of nothing , /'. e. out of no fraextfttnt matter ; yet it is acknowledged by all, that no word uled by the Jews is movt p-ofer to that than i^13 is ; and P. Fagim cites it from R.Nachmani, that the He- brew Language hath no other word to figinfie fuch a froduBion out of nothing but K13. It is therefore a very weak manner oi arguing, that bccaufe Hi:2 is fometimes ufed for no more than Ghap.i. 'fke Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted. 413. than iTvI^y, therefore tne world was created out of pr^ex- ifient matter; all that can rat'wiialiy be inferred, is, that from the mere force and importance of that word the contrary can- not be colleded : but if other f I aces of Scripture compared , and the evidence of rcafon, do make ic clear that there could be no pra extfient matter which was uncreated^ then it will ne- ceilarily follow that creation mud be taken in its proper fence. And in this fence it is evident, that not only Jejvs and Chri- fiians y but even \\\^ Wathens themfelves underftood Mojes ^ as is plain by Galen, where he compares the opinion of Mofes , Galen, de ufa with that of Epicurm, and ingenuoufly confelleth that of Mo-P^^^- ^- J^- fej, which attributed the prodtSkn of things to God^ to be far more rational and probable than that of Epicure , which af- • figned the ongm of things to a mere cafual concourfe of ato?ns : but withal adds, that he mu ft diifent from both ; and fides with Mofes as to the origin of fuch things as depend on genera- tion, but alTerts the fra extfience of matter^ and withall, that God's p5wer ceuld not extend it felf beyond the capacity of the matter which it wrought ufon. Atque id efi^ laith he, tn qtto ratio nofira ac Flatonis , turn aliortim qui apud Gracos de re- rum natura reBe confcripferunt^ a Mofe diffidet. How true thefe words are , will appear afterwards. ChaUiditts in his Commentaries on Vlato\limiem^ where he fpeaks of the Gri- gin of uV«, which in him is ftill tranflated Sylva^ and inquires into the different opinions of all Vhilofophers about it, takes is for granted , that according to Mofes , this Jam had its prodn- Qhddd.inTim. f?io» from God. Hehrai jyl'vam generatam ejfe confitentur \p' 11'^' (^ttorum fapicntiffimm Moyfes non humana facundia^fed divma^ ut ferunt ^ injpiratione 'uegetatm ^ ineolihro^ cjui de genitura mtfndi cenfetur , ab excrdio fie eft profatus , juxta interpretation nem LXX. prudentium ; Initio Deus fecit cxlttm d^ terram. it-erra autem erat invifibilis Cr incompta. Ut ^uero ait A(\uila \ Caput rerum condidit Dem caelum ^ t err am ; terra porro in- ants erat (^ nihil \ 'velut Symmachrfs ; Ab exordio condidit De'* m ci^lum d^ terram. Terra porro fuit otiofum quid, confufum- que, d^ inordinatum. Sed Origenes afeverat it a fibs ab He- bra^ eJfe perfuafmn , qiiod m aliquantum fit a vera proprietate derivata interpretatio. Fuijf'e emm in exemplari, Terra autem • ftupida quadam erat admiratione. Omnia tamen hac ^n unum aiunt concurrere , ut d^ generata fitea qua fubje^ efi tmi- verjo' :4r-4 Or twines Sacrce : Book HI. 'verfo corpcr:, fjlva^ fermo72sJhue ip:os ^ interpretantur. Where we find by the TePiimony of Chalculnfs an univerfal confent as to the prcduttion of the univerfal corporeal matter by God-^ for that is all which is underi^ood by his term of gencrata efi. But this fame Author afterwards tells us, that'by Hea- njmi and Earth in the firft i;er[e of Genefis^ \\x are not to un- derlland the 'uiy'/i'/e H^^x'e^zj and Earth: For^ faith he , ths Hea'uens^ 'which are called the Ftrmament^ 7vere created after ^ and on the third day^ when the JVaters were feparated^ the dry Land appeared^ which was called Earth. J^i tumtiltuario con- tent i flint iJitelleHii , c eel urn hoc quod 'videmtfs , ^ t err am qua Juhz'shimur, dici fi4tant ; forro ojui altiits indagant^ negam hoc coelum ah initio faUum ^ [ed [ecundo dk» And therefore by the Hea'vens he underftands hicorfoream Naturam^ and by earthy ^m^ or the pnmigenial matter. And this^ faith he, ap- pars hy the following words , T^he Earth was in-vtfible and without form ; i.e. this corporeal matter, before it was brought into order by the fo7i;er and wildom of God ^ remained a rude and indigefed lump ; and that which is fo, might well be called mv'ifihle and without for ?n. And therefore it is cal- led inanis and nihil , becauie of its capacity of receiving all forjns^ and having none of its own. Sjmmachzts calls it otiofa d^ indigefta ; the former, becaufe of its inability to produce any thing of it felf : the latter, becaufe it wanted a divme power to bring it into due order. . Th^tfiupidity and admira- tion which Origen attributes to it , he conceives to relate to the Majefiy of God, who was the Orderer and Contriver of it, fiquidem Opificis d^ AuBoris fui Majefiate capta fiupuerit^ Thus we fee that according to Mofes, the firft matter of the ijjorld was produced by God, which is largely manifefted by O- ■ ... rigen againft the Marcionifis , a fragment of which is extant c-atfr^. Tertul ^^^ ^^^ Philocalia ; and by TertuUtan againft Hermogenes , and r,d vurmog. per Others, who from the opinion of the pr^^e-exiftence of matter, tot. are called Matenarii. ^ Seth 9. Having thus cleared the fence of Mofes, it is far more dif- ficult to find out the true opinions of the ancient Philofophers concerning the production or eternity of corporeal matter, there • having been Co great dijfentions , not only about the thing bcAnhnapre. it^ fe]f,^but about the opinions of fome about it. For it is creat.cTimao. plain h)' J^Iutarch's '^:>s)J^via., as well as the difcourfes of the later Chap. z. The Divine Authority of-ihe Scriptures ajje'rted, ' 4 r> later VUtomfts , how e^er fome have been to interpret Via- tor Timam in favour of the eterfi'ny^ at lead of 77iatte>\ if not of the world. But although Flato doth alTert therein a fra- exlflrercs of rude matter , before the formation of the ivcrld , yet I fee no reafon why he fliould be otherwife underfioodthm in the fame fe77ce that we beheve a Chaos, to have gene before the bri77ging the ivorld into the- order it is now in. And in that fence may thofe places in F tut arch be interpreted, iy6ly.i^ iih \pIQ- w ^i and fb like- wife thofe following words , 0 -^ .^a^ »7? (£,ua. 7I etc-jfuajov , l-n 'ivx^i^ 70 A'^'^v i7ninv r dtoV. They make two prin- -. yjiQ . to. .1. f.j^i^^ of the Unizierfe , cm a^fve , and the other paff^je ; the p^ffive, an efjence without duality., called Hyle^ or confufed mat' ter \ the atli-ve , the reafcn which aBs in the other ^ which i^s Epft. 6$. God. Thefe two Principles Seneca calls Caufa & Materia ; efj'e I'cro debet, faith he, aliquid unde fat \ deinde, ^ cjuo fiat y hoc caufa eft, illud materia. Although Seneca feems to make Prafat.adNat. a query of it elfe where ; (^uantuih Deus pofjit ? mater lam ipje g|<«/. Eelog. ^1^- pYmel:, an data utatur? But Zenc is exprefs in Stobatts^ ov, %7i mhiUo yyva>[Av\w «t£ \\dLT\o>. The fir ji ejjcnce of all is mat- ter, which is eternal, and not capable of accejfion, or diminution. In Tirr:,f. 388. Xo the lame purpofe Chalcidius fpeaks, Stoici crtum [ylv^ re^ jiciimt , ^uin pctim ipfam d^ Deum , duo totiits rei fumunt ini- tia ; Deum, ut opificem ; Sylvam, ut e]ua opcrationi fubjtcia- tur. Una €juidem ejjentia praditos facientem , & ejuod fit ac fatitur, id corpus ejj'e ; diver j a Tjero njirtute \ c\uia faciat^ De- um ; o^uia fiat, Syluam eJJ'e, SetL 10. Having now found out the certain Aflertors among the Hea-- then Fbn'ofipt'crs of the eternity and improduclion of matter as • the p^llfii e principle of things, we come to examine the reafcn ^ of this d^^-pothefis, aad whether there were foundation enough for Chap.x. The Divhe Authority of the Scriptures afferteJ, 4 1 y for this matter to fubfifl upon from all eternity ? It might be fufEcient prejudice againft this opinion, that it was built on the fame infirm comlufiovsv^hxchth^it oi xh^ eternity of the whole world was, 'viz,, that Maxim which Lipfim attributes to DemocritttSy but was embraced by all thofe Vhilofophers who denied produtlion of rr^atter^ fMt«>7, that Gcd can do nothing without its aid and concurrence-, ^nd io ^sTertullmn (h^v^ly Tdys, Gcd is beholding to matter for every Being known to the world] grande bene- ficmm Chap.i The Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajjerted, 41^ •Return Deo contullt ut haherefhodie per ejuam Deus cognofcere^ tur^ (^ omnipotens ^ocaretur, mji quod jam non emn'tptefiSy ft non d^ hoc fotens ex nihilo omnia froferre. Thus We fee hoW irreconcilable this Hyfothejis is with thefe Attributes of God. 4. It is repugnant to the tmmenfity of God, For either God did exift feparate from this eternal matter^ or was ccnjoyned with it J if conjoyned with it, then both made but one Being, as Maximijs^ or Origen argues ; if feparate from it, then Ong. Phlkc there muft be fomething between them, and (b there will be c- 24- three r^^/ improduced thmgs. If it be anfwercd that they are neither ccnjoyned nor feparate^ but God is in matter as in his proper flace^ as the Stoicks aflerted, it is eafily reply ed, that either then he is in a part of matter, or the whole matter ; if in a part only, he cannot be immenfe ; if in the whole as his ada^uate place, how could he then ever frame the World 2 For either he muft then recede from that part in which he was, and contraB himfelf into a narrower compals that he might fajldion that part of the World which he was about, or elfe he might likewile frame part of himfelf with that part of the World which he was then framing of, which confe- quence is unavoidable on the Stotcal Hypothefis of God's being corporeal and confined to the World as his proper place. And fb much for this fecond Hypothefis concerning the Origin of the Unizrerfe, which fuppoleth the eternity of matter as co-exijiing with God. I come now to that which makes moft noife in the World, Sect, 1 1\ which is the Atomical or Epicurean Hypothefis, but will ap- pear to be as irrational as either of the foregoing, as far as- it concerns the giving an account of the Origin of the Univerfe. For otherwife fuppofing.aDf//'^ which {)roduced the world and put it into the order it is now in, and fupremely governs all things in the world, that many of the Vhanomena of the Vni- 'uerfe^ are far more intelligibly explained by matter and mo^ tion than by fubjlantial forms, and real qualities, few free and unprejudiced minds do now fcruple. But becaule thelc little particles of matter may give a tolerable account of many appearances of nature^ that therefore there fhould be nothing elfe but matter and motion in the World, and that the Origin ©f the Univerfe (liould be from no wifer principle than the cafual concourfc of thefe Atoms, is one of the evidences of the H h h 1 ' pronenefs 4io Origines Sacm : Book IIL pronencfs of mens minds to be intoxicated with thole opinions they are once in love with. When they are not content to allow an Uypothefis. its due place and fubferviency to God. and providence, but ' think thefe Atoms have no force at all in them unlefs they can extrude a Deity quite out of the World. For it is moft evident that it was not fo much the truth as the fer^viceahlenefs of this Hyfothefis^ which hath given it entertainment among men of Atkeifiical fpirits. Epicurus ' himfelf in his Epiftle to Vythocles urgeth that as a confidera- ble circumftance in his opinion that he brought no God down upon the it-age to put things in order, j^ « ^iia (puV/j ^{o<; 'mviu .Apud. Diog. /^HcAtA'i <:ffa^'^y'^> which his Paraphraft Lucretms hath thus Laert.i.io. j^endrcd. ^T^^ i Nequaquam nobis divinittts ejje par at am JSfaturam rerum. If this opinion then be truey the hifiory of the creation quite falls to the ground, on which account we are obliged more par- ticularly to confider the reafon of it. The Hypothejts then of Epicurus is, that before the Tvorld was brought into that form and order it is now in^ there was an infinite empty jpace in which were an innumerable company offolid particles or Atoms of different fizzes and Jhapes, which by their weight were in continual motion, and that by the various occur fions of thefe ^ all the bodies of the XJni'verfe 'were framed into that order they now are in. Which is fully exprefled by Dionyfius in Eufebius, and p j^^ very agreeably to the fence of Epicurus in his Epiftles to He- l\^. c. 2 2 ^. rodotus and Eythocles^'^ndi to what Flutarch reports of the fence 421. R. S(. of Epicurus, though he names him not (if at leaft that book be his which Muretus denies) the words of Dionyfius are De Placitis t^gfe conccming the Epicureans, ol [jlIv y6 dLiiy-^i a' % > / ^^ pi^Qyj^, KiVO-V, IMyclOi OLVneiOa^V <^^AKkO(^Ctj TAVTAf cFh (pAtTl TAi ctTO//»f ^ iTV^V OV TaT iUVOi (pi^/U^Af, AVTOjUATZaf 7i CVl^'TTllTJ^aAi a.hKli]hM( J^ia pu'/taif ATAif-lov i^ ffvy.'TMjt^^^Af S'ia to 'Jo\v^^ov a^Knhav ^KAfjL^eivi^ty )^ «7Ty Tovn yJi^, as well as his^^^re and Atoms \ for by the fame reafon that his Atoms would make cm world, they might make a thoufand ; and who would fpare for worlds^ when he might make them fo eafily ? Lucretms gives us in fo exadl an account of the feveral courfes the Atoms took up in difpofing themfelves into bodies^ as though he had been Muftar-Mafter -General at the great Ren- dezvouz, ; for thus he fpeaks of his Atoms. ^a cjtiia muUlmodis^ multts mutata fer omne Ex Infin'uo vexantur fercita flagis, Omne genus motus d^ coetus expermndo^. Tandem deven'mnt in taleis dijpofturas^ ^alihus hac rebus confifi'tt Jumma creata. And more particularly afterwards ; Sed quia mult a modis mult is frimordia rerum £j^^ j^ Ex Infinito jam tempore fercita pl^gisy Fonderibufque fuis confuerunt concita ferri^. Omnimodifcjue coire^ at que omnia pertentare^ S^^cunque inter fe poffunt congrejja creare y XJt non fit mirum^ fi in taleis dififofituras Deciderunt quoque^ ^ in taleis 'venere meatus^ ^alibus hac rerum genitum nunc fumma novando. Thus we fee thQ fub fiance of the Epicurean Hypothefis^ that' there was an Infinite number of Atoms, which by their fre- quent occurfions did at laft meet with thole of the fame nature with them, and thefe being conjoyned together made up thole bodies Vv^hich we fee ; {b that all the account we are able to give accordingrto this Hypothefis of all the Vh^nomma of the Univerfe^ is from the fortuitous concourfe of the Atoms in the firft forming of the world, and the different contexture c^ them in bodies. And this was delivered by the ancient Epicu- / reans not with any doubt or Hefitation, but with the greateft confidence imaginable. So TuUy oblerves of Felleius the Epicu- £fg ^at, j^^^^^ r^^;?,beginning his difcourle,^^erfe by A- toms can ever be proved true, either by the judgment of fenfe^ or by Anttctpation. SeB, 1 5. The way they had to prove this Hjpothefis was' infujpcient ; 2. and that was by proving that the bodies of the world are compounded of fuch injenjible particles ; Now, granting the thing, I deny the confequence ; for what though the compofi- tim of bodies be from the contexture of Atomsj doth it there- fore follow, that thele particles did cafually produce thefe bodies ? nay doth it at all follow, that becaufe bodies upon their refolution do fall into inftnfible particles of difFerent/':^f , figure and motion^ therefore thefe particles muft be pra-exi- ftent to all bodies In the world ? For it is plain, that there is now an Univerfal lump of matter out of which thefe in- fenfible particles arife, and whither they return on the dif- folution of bodies ; and all thefe various corpufcles may be of the fame uniform fub fiance only with the alteration o{ fiz^e^jhape and motion ; but what then ? doth this prove, that becaufe par- t.Calar bodies do now emerge out of the 'various configuration and motion of infenfible particles of that matter which exifis in the world, that therefore this whole matter was produced by the cafual occur fums of thele Atoms ? It will ask more time and pains than is ufually taken by the Philofophers ei- ther ancient or modern, to prove that thole things what- (bever they are, whether elements or particles out of which bodies are fuppofed to be compounded^ do exift feparately from fuch compounded bodies, and antecedently to them We find no Arifiotehan elements pure in the world , nor any particles of matter deftitute of fuch a fiz,e^ fig^^^ and motion as doth make fome body or other. From whence then can we inferr either the extfience of Arijlotle's materia primayV^^lth- OUt cjuiddity^ quantity^ OX quality, or the Epicurean Atoms without fuch a contexture as makes up fbme bodies in the world ? Our profound Naturalifi Dr. Harvey, after his moft accurate fearch into the natures and Generation of things^ delivers Chap.2. The Divine Anthority of the Scriptures ajferted. 415- clelivers this as his experience and judgment concerning the commonly reputed elements or fr maples of bodies. For (peak- ing of the different opinions of Emfedodes , and Hippocrates^ and Democritusy and Epkurm^ concerning the compofition of bodies, he adds, Ego ^vero necfue in animaltum produclione^ nee ^^ Generat. omnino in ulla corporum fimilarium generatwne, (five ea parti- '^"'^' *^^^''' um animaliumy fi've plantarum^ lapidum^ miner altum^ &C. fu- erit ) "vel congregation em ejufmodi, ^uel mifcihilia diver fa in generation^ opere unienda pra-exifiere^ ohfervare uncfuam po- tui. And after explaining the way which he conceived mofl rational and confonant to experience in the generation of things, he concludes his difcourfe with thefe words ; Idemcjue in omni generatio7ie fieri credtderim\ adeo ut corpora fimilaria mifia y elementa fua tempore prior a non baheant, fed tUa potim elemen- tis fuis prim exifvant (nempe Empedoclts atcjue Ariftotelts'igne^ a^ua^ aerCy terra^ zfel Cbjmicorum fale^ fulpbure, d^ Mercurioy aut Democriti atomis ) utpote natura efuoc^ue ipfis perfe^iiora. Sunt, inquam, mifia ^ compofita^ etiam tempore prior a elemen^ its (]Hihuflihet fie diBis, in cfu^e ilia corrumpuntur ^ definunt\ difj'olvuntur, fcilicetj in ifta ratione potins ouam re ipfa d^ aBu^ Elementa itaque o^ua dicunttir, non [unt prior a iflis rehus ^//^ generantur aut ori^'.ntur \ fed pofieriorapcttm^ d^ reliquia magis quam principia. Necjue Ariftoteles ipjemet aut alius cjuijpiam un* (^uam demonfiravity elementa in rerum natura feparatim extftere^ aut principta effe corporum fimilarium. If then none of thefc things which hodies are refol'ved into, and are fuppofed to be compounded of, either have been or can be proved to exift fe- farate from and a/necedent to thofe hodies which they com- pound, what then becoines of all our company of Atoms which are fuppofed by their concourfe in an infinite (face to be the ori- gin of the vjorld ? I know not where to find them , unlefs dancing with the Scbool-men's Chimera^s in a 'vacuum, or in a fpace as empty as the infinite one, vizj. ibme Epicurean's brains. Neither therein will they be much unlike their great mailer Epicurus, if wx believe the cbaraEler which the Stoick in TuUy gives of him, who faith he was bomo fine arte, fme Uteris, in- DeNat. Deh^. fultans in omnes, fine acumine ullo^ fine aucloritate, fine lepore. ^- ^• But allowing the Stoick fome of that paffton, (which he dif- claimed fo much ) in thefe ^uords ; yet we may rather believe wliat Tully himfclf elfewhere fpeaks of Epicurus his fenti- I i i me?nsi ^z6 Orighes Sacra; : Book III. weTits , that they were none of them handfom or hecomi?ig a DeDivhiat.li. man. At tllemiid fentit ? faith he of Epicurs/s ; and foon re- DeFinibuiiLi, plicS , fentit autem vihil mie^uam elegans ^ nihil decorum -^ and in another place fpeaking of his Morals, he faith, nihil gmerc- Jufn [apt at^^ue. magnificuw, there ivas nothing ncble and p-ene^ rotis in him. Which Cenfure of Eficun^, all the pains that P. GaJJendiis hath taken in the vindication of the life and op^ mo?is of Epicurus , hath not been able to wipe off For al- though we fhould yield what that learned man fo much con- tends for, that all the calumnies which were caft on Epicurus arile from the antipathy between Zeno and the following Sto- jcks and the School of Epicurus ; yet all this will not make E- picurus to have been comparable with fome other Thtlofophers for parts and judgment, whole Principles have fomewhat more generous and ^venerable in them, than the Moral: of Epicurus had, taking them in their more refined fence. «S'^^/. 14. But it is not the M^r^/i/y of iip^foT/^ii which we now en- quire after ; our bufinefs is to fee how well he acquits himfelf in rendring an account of the origin of the Um-verfe without a Deity, And fo we come to coniider the Hj pot hep it felf , i whether it be rational or no, or confiiknt with the Catholick \ Laws of nature which appear in the jvorld. Two things I: fliall here enquire into, which are the main principles of Epi- curus, 'viz, the motion of thefe Atoms in the infinite jj[> ace ^ and the manner of the concretion of bodies by the concourje of thefe Atoms. I. I begin with their motion ; wliich Epicurus attributes to his Atoms without any hefitation, and yet never undertakes to give an account of the origin of that motion •, which argues his whole Hypothefis to be extreamly precarious. The thing then, ( which he muft alfume as his main principle , without which all his other doe nothing) is. That motion doth infe- parably belong to the leaft Atom or infenfible particle ; for with- out this there cannot be imagined any concourfe of Acorns at all, much lefs any fuch co?itexture of bodies out of them. But I' for one to fay that Atoms move, hecaufe it is their nature to move , and give no other account of it , is lb precarious, that it will never give the leaft fatisfatlion to an inquifitive mind. y And it will be the leaft of all pardonable in the Exploders of Ij fubftantial forms and occult qualities , Vs\\cv\X\[t. origin of the '' whole. U.; *Chap.i. The Divine 4iithoritj of the Scriptures ajferted. 42 7 whole world is refolved into an cccult cjualitj which gives motion to Atoms. And herein the Atomifrs out-doe the molt -credulous Ferip^teticks, feeing they lay the ipnm^ foundation of the world and of their own philofopby together in a thing they can give no rational account of at all, which is, the motion of Atoms in an infinite 'vacuity. If it be replied, which is all E- ficurus hath to fay, that the motic-n of Atoms defends upon their gra'vity ; the queftion returns upon him with th^i^dmQ violence^ how comes this gravity to belong to thefe Atoms in fuch an empty Jpace , where there can be no impulfion from other bo- dies., no attraction from any magnetick particles which are fup- poled to be the caufes of the defcent of heavy bodies ? Nay , Epicurus himfelf takes away ^ny center of th'dt mot ion of Atoms; and yet attributes a neceflary defcent to his Atoms by virtue of thdv gravity, and if a Vhtlofopher may i'^^ fuch things as thefe are, fo repugnant to the Tbanomena. of nature., without af- ^hf^^-f- '•^•3- figning any other reafon for them, but that it is their nature, oJ'apparent. kt us never venture Philofophizmg more, but fit down in that magnimd. solis contented piece of ignorance which attributes the caufes of eve- humilis& ^uh- ry thing wmoJpecTfick forms and occult qualities. For this is ^^^^^^p.^./.i, fo fljamefuU a piece of beggery , that P. Gajjendus doth more n^ 7^^/ f 2 than once difclaim it , and in his difcourfe of motion doth y. ep. d'emotii prove an impojfibility of motion in an infinite empty Jfi ace. Might imprejfo d we- not Epicurm then have faved his credit better by fitting down ^^^^ trmflatQ, with the opinions of his fore-fathers.^ than thus to go a begging °' ^" ^^' for fuch Hypothefes , which none , who are not refolved to be ignorant, will be ready to grant him? But yet this is not all , but according to this fundamental Se5t, 15. principle of Epicurus, viz. That there is a principle of motion in -every infenfible particle of matter, he plainly overthrows ano- ther principle of his, which is, the foltdity and different magni- tude of thefe Atoms, Thefe particles are fuppofed fofolid, that DwnyfiM in Eufebms tells US the account given why they are cal- p^^^^^ Evaijgel led di-niMt was, SittrhJ^ Akvlov ^ippvptd, becaufe of their indifio- 1. 14. c. 22. luble firmnef \ and the different fizzes of thefe Atoms is fo ne- celTary a principle, that from thence they undertake to refolve many ph^emmena of t\it-Univerfs : let US now fee how confi- ftent thefe things are with the infeparable property of motion belonging to Atoms : For if there be particles of fuch different fizzes., then it is plain that there are Ibme particles which may I ii 2 not 41 8 - Ortgines SacnB : Book lit not only be conceived to be bigger than others^ but are reaUy fo ; and fo there muft be more parts of matter iwagined in this bigger f article than in another lefs ; and if there be more farts^ theie farts may be conceived feparate from each other, that this farticU may be ecfual to the other ; now then, I de- mand, if motion doth infcparably belong to the ieaft particle of matter, how comes one to be bigger than the other > .for here- in we fee that every f article is not in diftinft motion ; for there cannot but be more imaginable f articles in an Atom of a big- ger fize than in a lels ; and if fo, there muft be fome union of thofe imaginable particles in that bigger Atom ; and how could fuch an union be v^ithout refi, and what refi could there be if motion doth infeparably belong to every particle of matter ? And fo it muft be in all thole Atoms which are fuppofed to have angles and hooks , in order to their better catching hold of each other, for the compo/ition of bodies ; how come the(e hooks and angles to be annexed to this Atom ? for an Atom may be without them ; whence comes this union , if fuch a prin* ciple of motion be in each particle ? if it be anfwered, that mo* tion did belong to all thefe particles , but by degrees the leffer particles hitting together made up thefe angled and hooked par" tides ; I foon reply, that the difficulty returns more firongly ; ' . for if thefe angled and hooked p(irticles be fuppofed necejfary to the contexture and union of bodies ; how came thoife leafl imaginable particles ever to unite without fuch hooks and an-- gles ? And fo the quejtion will return in infinitum. If then the folidity and indivifibility of thele angled Atoms^ doth de- pend on the union and reft of thofe leffer imaginable particles joyned together , then it is evident that motion is no infepara^ ble property of all thefe particles , but fbme are capable of «w/- X on^ m order to the making of fuch hooks and angles , which are necefTary for the contexture of bodies ; and where there is union and folidity, there is r^/, which is at Ieaft accompanied with it, if it be not one of the great caufes of it. And with- out which the Atomifts , of all other Philofophers , will be Ieaft able to give an account of firmnef in bodies when they, make bodies to confiftof an aggregation o^ particles y by \^ihich y Dgf^artes ^^ ^^^^ ^^ ^^^7 ^^^^ finding a fufficient account of the difFe- fnncij>. p. 2. rence between fluid and firm bodies, unlefs it be from the quick- ^^f- 54;55)S^' er motion and agitation of the f articles of fluid bodies, and the Chap.i. The Divine j^uthority of the Scriptures ajfertei. ' 4^9 . Yef of the fmall and contiguous farts that make up the/r;»» hody , according to that Catholick Law of nature , whereby things continue in the (late they are in till fome firongor force futs them out of it. The only thing which the Epicurean Ate- mtfrs have left to give any account of the foltdity of particles of fuch different /ssf/, is, the want of 'vacuity ; for, fay they, the ground of diviCihility of bodies is the interj^erjion of a dijj'e- minated vacuum ; now where there k no vacuity , though the f articles he of different fiz,e , yet they may he jdltd and indivi- fible. But this is taken off by the inftance produced againft Hlftory of other perfons by that ingemous and honourable Perlon Mx. Boyle ^^'*^^- ^"^ in his Phyftolcgtcal Ejfays, which is to this purpofe, Sufpfe ^'''"' ^' ^''*' two cf thefe pre fumed indivifihle f ar tides , both fmooth and of a cubical figure y Jbould happen to lie upon one another , and a third (hould chance to be fitly placed uf on the upper of the two ; what jJjould hinder but that this Aggregate may by the violent knock of fome other corpufcles be broken in the midfir of the whole- concretion^ and confe^uently in the middlemofi body ? For fiip- po(e them as fblid as may be , yet fince corpufcles as hard as they, can be made very violently to knock againft them, why may not thofe grate or break the middlemofl corpufcle^ or any of the others ? And if there be a pofftbdity of breaking off thefe cubical particles in the middle , then mere want of va- cuity is no fufficient account of their being indivifible. By this we fee how far the Atomifis are from giving any rational ac- count of the origin of the motion of the Atoms themfelves with- out a Deity. 2. Suppofing this motion to be granted them, yet they can- SeB\ i6» not give any fatisfaBory account of the manner of concretion of bodies by the cafual occur fions of thefe Atoms moving in an infinite empty j^ ace. Which appears from thofe grofs and ex- travagant j^/);>o///o»j of Epicurus^ in order to the making thefe Atoms of his fo hit together that they make up any bodies by their contexture. I. He fuppoleth as it were two regions^ a fuperiour and in- feriour in an infinite empty Jp ace ^ which hath no center at all in it, nor any body^ from which to meafure thofe refpe(fls of ^- hove and bclow^ as appears by his Epiftle to Herodotus^ where- in he faith, thefe terms of diva and n^TUy or upwards and down- wards , mufi be conceived, without any hounds or limits at all: 4S9. * Origms Sacr^^: Book IIT. * So that though ive concet've fcmething fuferlour^ 'xve fnufi ima- gine nothing Juprewe , and Jo on the contrary. Whereby it is Phylic.f.i. /.3. tn-dtntyZsGaJJhiJ^^s confelfeth, that Epicurus thought the fur- f' 7' face of the Earth to be a plain^ and this plain to be continued up in a level fuperficies to the heavens^ and fo to all that im- menfe Jpace of th^Univerfe. So that all thofe heavy bodies which Ihould fall downwards in any parts of the wideft di- fiance on the earth, as in Europe, Afia, and Africa, would ne- ver meet (if they continued their motion) in the center of the earth , but would continue their motion ftill in a parallel line ; and fo he imagined that which is faid to be aho^e as to us^ was really the upper part of the world, and fo the defcent of his Atoms, muil necellarily be downvjards towards the earthy ac- cording to the 7u eight of them. And was not this a worthy mathematical fuppofition, for one who would undertake to give an account of the origin of th^ Univerfe without a Deity ^ This motion of dejcent by reaibn of the gravity of Atoms would not ferve his turn ; for if the Atoms moved downwards thus in a parallel line , how was it poffible for them ever to meet for the contexture of bodies ? Now for this pur pole he invented a motion of declination ; for finding the motion ad lineam^ or ad perpendiculum as fome call it, could not poflibly produce thofe varieties of bodies which are in XhtUniverfe^ he fuppofed therefore the defcent not to be in a perpendicu- lar right line ^ but to decline a little, that fo leveral particles in their defcent might make ibme occur fions one upon ano- DeFin. li. ther. And this Epicurm added to Democriti/s; but therein as Tully obierves, was very unhappy, that where he adds to Democritus, ea qu^^ corrigere vult, mihi quidem depravare o/i- deatur ; that he marr'd what Democritus had faid , by men- ding of it. The reafon of which motion of declination is thus given by Lucretim^ De rermn nat. ^od nifi declinare folerent^ omnia deorfum I. 2. Jmbris uti gutta caderent per Inane profundum ; jN^c foret offenfus natus , neque plaga creata Trincipiis , it a ml unquam natura creajjeu It was obvious to ob)e£t, That, according to the Principles of Epicurus y there could have been no concourfe ^.td[\oi Atoms in t an chap. z. the Divine Authority of the Scriptures afferteJ. 43 1 an infimte fiace, on the two grounds he went on, which were , the natural defcent of Atoms ^ and the aqu'i'veloctty of the mo- tion of all Atoms of what fize fo ever, which he likewife afler- . ted (although one would think, \i gravity were the caufe of motion^ then the more gravity , th^pwifter the ?notion would be) from hence, I fay, it were not eaOe to conceive how the Atoms fhould embrace each other in a parallel line, if ihey fell down, as Lucretius exprelieth it, like drops of rain ; and there- fore they faw a neceffity to make their motion decline a little , that fo they might jufile and hk one upon another. But this chitcjue motion of the Atoms, though it be the only refuge left to jalve the origin of things by a concourfe of Atoms, is yet as precarious and without reafon as any otliQv fuppofition of theirs whatfoever. TuHj chargeth this motion oi declination Wwh De Fin. ban. & two grQRt faults , futility, and inejficacy , qu^e cum res tota^^l-^^^- ^^ fiBa Jit fueriliter^ turn ne ejjicit o^uidem c\uod vult. It is a child-' i^ fancy and to no purpofe : For,/r/, It is alTerted without any reafon at all given for it, which is unworthy a Fhilofopher \ nei- ther is to any parfofe\ for if all Atoms, faith he, decline in their motion, then none of them will/ic>^ together; if fome decline^ and others do not, this is as precariom as any thing, can be ima- gined , to affign a di-verfity of motion in mdivijible particles , which yet have all the lame ^velocity of motion ; and, as TuUy laith. Hoc erit quafi frovincias atomis dare. cjUie re^e, (]ua oh' licfue ferantur ; as though Epicurus were the General at this- Rendez^vouz. of Atoms, v;ho ftands ready to appoint every one his task and motion. This Plutarch tells us was the great charge againft Epicurus, ai ava/Tiov \7rHoy,y>v]t Kivn World for the fake of the Eftcurean HypetJoeJis ; and whether 0 it be not the height of credM-Uty^ as well as infidelity, to believe , the world ever to have been made by a fortuitous concourfe of Atoms. I. 'Wxt great variety of appearances in nature ^v^\\\q\\ are attri- buted to f articles of the fame nature^ only with the ah ei- at ion of fiz^e^ jkape and motiov. That fome r/?/;?^/ in the world, fliould have no other reafon given of them, may net only be tolerable, but rational, as in the chjeBs and operations on the organs of fenfe^ thofe ajf'eBions which are miiiaken for real cfualities^ &LQ. But that all thofe ejf^eBs which are feen in na- ture^ fliould have no other cauje hwt the diiferent confignra- mn and motion of Atoms, is the height o{ follj as well as impiety. To imagine that the particles of matter, as they are in we??, fliould be capable of fen fat ion, memory, intelleBicny volition, &c. merely becaufc of a different Jhafe,fiz,e md mo- tion from what they have in a p^Vce of t/^W, is a riddle that- requires a new configuration of Atoms in us to make us /^;?^fr- /^^^i. May it not be hoped, that at leaft one time or other by this cafual concourfe of Atoms, the particles may light to be of fuch a nature mficnes, as to make them fly ; in plants, to make them all fenfiive; and in beafi-s to make them reafon and difcourfie ? What may hinder fuch a configuration or w?d>- /ifl« oi particles, if all thele ^/if^i are to be imputed to no higher principle ^ We lee in other bodies what different ap- pearances are caufed by a fudden alteration of the particles of the matter of which they are compounded ; why may it not fall out (b in the things mentioned ? Neither can this be un- reafbnable to demand, i. Becaule the motion oi th^fQ par- ticles of matter is cafual fl:ill according to them ; and who knows what chance rmy do ^. for thQ Jeminal principles tbem- jelves are, I fuppole, according to them of the fame uniform matter with the reft of the world, and fo are liable to diffe- rent motion and configuration. 2. Becaule all particles of matter are fuppofed to be in continual motion , becauie of that dlffeminated Vacuity which is prefumed to be in the world, and becaufe a Coacervate^ Vacuity is not only afferted as pofiible, but as probably exifient : I affume only then (that which is infifted on as probable) viz., that that fpace which lies between our Atmefphere and the Stars is empty of any K k li other • 434 Ofigines Sacra : Book III. other thing, but only the rays of the Stars which pals through ^ it ; I then fuppofing it a vacuity, whether would not the far- ticks of thole bodtes which lie contiguous to that l}>ace pre- fently dijlodge from the bodies wherein they are, and begin a new Rendex^voHZ, of Atoms^ there ? for all Atoms are fiip- pofed to be in ferfttual motion ; and the caufe affigned, why ia fblid bddies they do not fly away, is becaufe of the refercuffion of other Atoms^ that when they once begin to //r, they re- ceive fuch knocks as make them (\um in their places. Now this cannot hold in the bodies contiguous to thisy/>^c^ ; for both thofe bodies are moix fluid, and fo there is no fuch knocking of "particles to keep them at refi ; but which is more, thofe which are contiguous have nothing at all to hinder them from motion^ and fo thofe particles will necefiTarily remo've into that empty [face where there is no impediment of their motion^ and fo the next Atc>ms to thofe muft remo^e^htcdw^^xh^t Jpace wherein the other were is made empty by their remo'val •, and fb the ne.xt^ and fo on, till not only the air, but the vjhole mafs of the earth will on fuppojition of fuch a 'vacuity be dif- folved into its firft particles, which will all mutt?jy in the le- veral bodies wherein they are, and never refi till they come to that empty /pace, where they may again Rendez.'vouz, to- gether. So dangerous is the news of Liberty^ or of an £mpty [pace to thele Democratical particles of the Uniz^erfe. Nei- ther can 1 fee how a dijj'eminated ^acuit^ can fal^e the dif- ficulty ; for thofe particles of the moft joltd bodies, being in continual motion, and the ground of their union being reper- cujjion, it thence follows that towards that part where the diffeminated vacuum is, the particles meeting with no fuch ftrokes may fairly take their leaves of the bodies they are in, and fo one fucceed in the place of another, till the configura- tion of the whole be altered, and confequently different ap~ fearances and effeBs may be caufed in the fame bodies, though it refults from fcminal principles. So that according to the Atomical principles, no rational account can be given of thofe efi^cBs which are feen in nature. This Dicnyfius in Eujcbius frap. Evang. urgeth againft the Atomifis, that from the fame principles L 14. c, 24. without evident reafion given for it, they make of the fiime uniform matter fome things confpicuous to fenfe, others not, iomQ jJjcrt-livedj others extreamly long-lived, Jhei 5 TfoVo;; Cliap.i. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferteJ, 4 j j Atavtet, d{ etVTVi (pn^iiV av, OTy^atTtt, « (JLAX^^eLiayd yi xj*' ^ «'7W^ ovoueLovLviA, (poupo^et It >i) dtfctv'^'y What ground can there be af- pgned of [0 vaft- a difference between things if they all be of the fame nature, and differ only in fix^e and Jh ape ? faith that ex- cellent perfon, who there with a great deal of elocfuence lays open the folly of the Atomical Fhilofophyy QAV(/,a.gvi y^ 7^ atI- fjiiveoy eHf (^'a.y n y^THtTKlui^v (Tvpoikiav • iTni^fifj.ivay. It is a rare Democraty of Atoms j faith he, where the friendly Atoms meet and embrace each other ^ and from thence forward live in the clofefi fociety together, ^ 1. Not only the 'variety^ but the exaB order and beauty of the world is a thing unaccountable by the Atomical hyfothe- fis. Were the whole world ftill a Hefiod\ Chaos (from the Confideration of which Diogenes Laertim tells us Epicur^fs laert.i. 10. began to Philofophiz^e) we might probably beUeve an agitation of particles (fuppofing matter created / might fettle it in fuch a confufed manner \ but that there fhould be nothing elle but a bhnd impetus of Atoms to produce thofe ^aft and mofl regular motions of the heavenly bodies^ to order the paffage of the Sun for fb great conveniency of nature^ and for the 2\ltrv\'3itt jucceffion of the feafons of the year, which ihould cut fuch channels for the Ocean, and keep that vafi body of the water fwhofe furface is higher than the earth) from overflowing it, which (liould fumifli the earth with fuch fe- minal and proUfick principles, as to provide /(^(/^ and nourifh^ went for thofe Animals which live upon it, and furniOi out every thing neceflary for the comfort and delight of mans life ; to believe I fay, that all thefe things came only from a blind zn^ fortuitous ^unco'Arfe 0^ Atoxns, is the moft prodigious piece of credulity and f oily, th^t humaiie nature is lubjed to. But this part which concerns the order and beuutj of the parts of the Univerfe^ and the argument thence, that it could be no blind fortuitous principle, but an Infinitely 7mfe God, hath been fo ^' .' ^^^f^\ ^ fully and judicioufly handled by ^learmdVerJon already, that Atheiiin^parc I (hall rather choofe to referr the ReadeP'^e his difcourfe than 2. infift any more upon it. Kkk 2 % The A 7 6 Origines Sacrce : Book IIII- ^ 5. The ^ro4uBion of mankind is a thing which the Atomifis are moft (liamefully puzzled with, as well as the Formaticn of the internal farts oi mans Wj, of which I have already fpoken in the precedent Chapter. It would pity one to fee what lamentable j']j//7x the yltomifis are put to, to find out a way for the frodu^ion of mankind^ viz T:hat cur teem'wg mo- ther the earthy at lafi cafi" forth fome kind of bags like wombs upon the fur face of the earthy and thefe by degrees breakings at lafi came out children^ Tifhicb were nourijlyed by a kind of juyce of th.^ earth like milk^ by which they were^ brought up till they came to be men. Oh what will not Arheifl's believe rather than a Deity and Providence I But left we fliould feem to wrong the Jtcmifis^ hear what Cenforinus- Cenfir.de die faith of Epicurus ; Is enim credidit Umo calefa^fos uteros nef" I^at. c. 2. cio cjuos radicibm terra coharentes, prtmum incre'vijj'e, d^ /»- fantibm^ ex fe edit is ingenitum latlis humorem.^ natura mini^- firante pri^buiffe \ quos ita educatos d^adultos, gen^is humanum fropagajfe. But bscaufe Lucretius may be thought to fpeak. more impartially in the cafe, how rarely doth he defcribeit ? Crefcebazt uteri terra radicibm apti, ^uos ubi tempore maturo patefecerit atas Infantum^ fugiens humor em, auraje^ue petijfens.^ Convertebat tbi natura foramina terra, Et juccum 'venis cogeb at f under e apertis ConfimiUin latiis \ ficut nunc fxmina cjUccque Sjium ptperit dulci repletur latte, cjuod omnts Impetus in mammas conquer tit ur iUe aliment i : Terra cibum pueris, 'vefiem 'vapor, herb a cub lie Frabebat, mult a d^ moUi lanugine abundans* Had L^cr^/iwi been only a P<3g?, this might have palfed for a handfomly dcfcribed Fable : but to deliver it for a piece of- Philofophy^ makes it the greater Mythology : that man's body was formed out of the earth we believe, becaufe we have rea- fon fo to do •, but that the earth (liould caft forth fuch folli- cull, as he exprefleth it, and that men fliould be brought up in fuch away as hp ace ^ Fcome now to the laft Hypothefis mentioned, which un- ^^^ ^^.. dertakes to give an account of the Origin of the Umverfie from the mere Mechanical Laws of motion and matter, Which is the Hypothefis of the late famous French Vhilofopher M. Des Cartes. For although there be as much reafon- as charity to believe that he never intended his Hypothefis as a- foundation of Atheifm, having made it fo much his bufinefs to aflert the exifience of a Deity and i?nmateriality of the foul ;, 3'ct becaufe it is apt to be ahufed to that end by perfons A- - ■ theifiicalij difpoied, becaule of his afcnbing fo much to the- tower of matter : we (hall therefore fo far confider it as it un- dertakes to give an account of the On^w of xh^Umverfe without a Deny. His Hypothefis therefore is briefly this. He/'m;r/>.^ 3. takes it for granted, that ail the ?r. at t cr .of- ih^ ji^urld was at '^''^- "t^^ ^^^ tirfi of one Uniform nature^ divifihle into innumerable partSy and divided into many,which were all in motion : from hence he fuppofe th n. Origmes Sacra :^ ^"^ Book HI. fuppofeth, I. That all the matter of v^htch the Vniverfe is compofedy ivas at firfi di'Vided tnto eejual f articles of an indif- ferent fiz,e^ and that they had all fuch a motion as is now found in the world. 2. That all thofe particles were not at firfi Sph^ricaly becaufe many fuch little Globes joyned toge- ther will not fill up a continued /pace, but that of whatever figure they were at firfi^ they would by continued motion be' come fpharical^ because they would have various circular mo- tions . for feeing that at firfv they 7vere moved with fo great force that one particle would be d is joyned from the other^ the fame force coTitinuing would ferve to cut off all angles which are fuppofed in them^ by their frequent occur pons againfl each other ; and fo ivhen the angles were cut off, they would become fpharical, :^ He fuppofeth that no f pace is left empty ^ but when thofe round particles being joyned^ leave fome intervals between them, there are fome more fubt lie particles of matter^ which are ready to fill up thofe Void fpaces^ which arife from thofe angles which were cut off from the other particles to make them fpharical ; which fragments of particles are fo lit- tie, and acquire thereby fuch a celerity of motion, that by the force of that, they will be divided into innumerable little fragments, and fo 7vill fill up all thofe fpaces 7vhich other particles could not enter in at. 4. That thofe particles which fill up the inter- vals betJi^een tbefph^rical ones, have not all of them the fame celerity of motion, becaufe fome of them are more undivided than others are, which filled up the [pace between three Globu- lar particles when their angles were cut off, and therefore thofe particles mufl nectffarily have very angular figures, which are unfit for motion, and thence it comes to paf that fuch particles mfily flick together, and transferr the great efl part of their mo- tion upon thofe other particles which are lefs, and therefore have afipifter motion ; and becaufe the fe particles are to pafs through fuch triangular Jpaces which lie in the midft of three Globular "particles touching each other, therefore he fuppofeth them as to their breadth and depth to be of a triangular figure, but becaufe thefe particles are fomewhat long ; and the globular particles through which they pafs with fo fiuift motion have their ro- tat'ion about the poles of the Heavens, thence he fuppo(es that thofe triangular particles come to be wreathed. Now from thefe things being thus fuppofedj Dcs Cartes hath ingenuoufly and confonantly Chap. 2. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures afferted, 43 5^ conlbnantly to his principles undertaken to give an account of the moft noted Thancmena of the world and thofe three forts of particles mentioned, he makes to be his three elements ; the frfi is that fukile matter which was fuppofed to arife from the cuttings off the angles of the greater particles ; and of this he tells us the Sun and fixed Stars confift, as thole particles of that fubtile matter being in continual motion have made thofe (everal 'vortices or ethereal whirlpools. Thefecond element confifts of the j^harical particles themfelves, which make up \kit Heavens \ out of the third element , which arc thofe wreathed particles ^-ht gives an account of the formation of the earthy and Vianet s^ and Comets-, and from all of them by the help of thofe common affeSlions of matter, fiz,e,figurey motion, &c. he undertakes to give an account of the Fhano- mena of the world. How far his principles do conduce to the giving mens minds fatisfadlion, as to the particular Vha- nomena of nature, is not here our bufinefs to enquire, but^ only how far thefe principles can give an account of the Ori- gin of the Univerfe without a Deity ? And that it cannot give a fatisfaftory account how the world was framed without a Deity, appears by the two grand fuppo fit ions on which all his elements depend, both which cannot be from any other principle but God. Thofe are, i . The exifience of matter in the world which we have already proved cannot be indepen- dent on God, and necelfarily exiftem ; and therefore fuppofing that matter exiftent and put into ?notion, would grind it felf into thofe feveral particles by him fuppofed, yet this cannot give any account of the Origin of the Univerfe without a Deity. 2. The motion of the particles of matter fuppofeth a ^^'^^^°^^ ^- ^-^ Deity ; for matter is no felfmoving principle, as hath been immorrality fully demonftrated in feveral places by that judicious Philo- of the foul, k fopher, Dr. H.More, who plainly manifefts that if motion did i-c.n.f.^. &c, neceffarily belong to 'matter.^ it were impolTible there (liould be ^^' ^- ^A^'^^' Sun, or Stars, or Earth, or Man in the iVorld ; for the r/^at- ^' ter being uniform, it muft have equal motion in all its parti- cles, if motion doth belong to it. For motion being fuppo- fed to be natural and efjmtial to matter, muft be alike every- where in it, and therefore every particle muft be fuppofed in motion to its utmoft capacity, and fb every particle is alike and moved alike : and therefore thece being no prevalency at all iDr, 440 -Or/ghes Sacr^ -: Book IFL An any one particle above another in higmfs or motion, it is cnanifeft that this wnverfal matter, to whom motion is fo f/- fential and natural, will be ir.ejfe^tual for the producing of 5ny 'variety of appearances in nature ; for nothing could be ; c^«/eJ by this /^^i« and /«^/i/^ matter, but what ^vould be wholly imperceptible to any of our /?«/^j : and what a ilrange kind of i^i/z^/^ ot^or/J would this be ? Fronn hence then it appears that there mud be an infinitely powerful and •ivife God, who muft both put matter into motion, and r^^a- -/^re the ;;7of/o« of it, in order to the producing all thofe va- rieties which appear in the World. And this necefjlty of the motion q{ matter by a power given it from Qod is freely ac- knowledged by Mr. Des Cartes himfelf in tliefe words; Cen hy Thilofophers of the origin of evil , is jo clear and rational as this is, 4 That the moft material circumfiances of this account are attejted by the Heathens thanfelves, I. That if the Scriptures be true , Ged cannot be the author of Jin. For if the Scriptures be true , we arc bound without hefitation to yield our afjmt to them in their ^lain and direft affirmations^ and there can be no ground of fufpending afjent^ as to any thing which pretends to be a Dvvine Truths but the want of certain evidence , whether it be of Divine Revelation or no. No doubt it would be one of the moft effedual ways to put an end to the numerous controverfies of the Chrijlian world (efpecially to thofe bola dijfutes concerning the method and order of God'^ decrees) if the plain and undoubted afjer- tions of Scripture were made the Rule and Standard^ whereby we ought to judge of fuch things as are more obfcure and am- hi^uats. And could men but reft contented with thofe things which concern their eternal happinej?, and the means in or- der to it ( which on that account are written with all imagi- nable perJpicHity in Scripture) and the moment of all Other cow- troverfies be judged by their reference to thefe , there would be fewer controverfies and more Chrtfitans in the world. Now there are two grand principles which concern men's eternal condition , of which we have the greateft certainty from Scri- ture, and on which we may withfafety rf/;, without perplex- ing our minds about thofe more nice and iuhtilc peculations ( which it may be are uncapable of all full and particular re- folution ) and thofe are , That the rum and defhutlion of man is whjlly from himjelf-^ and, That his falvation ts from God alone If then mans ^uin and mifery be from himfelf; which the Scripture doth fo much inculcate on all occafions ; then without crntruve fii that which is the c/?«/i' of ^11 the mi fay of humane nature, is wholly from himfelf too, which is,//??. So that if the main J cope and dtji\n of the Scripture be true, God cannot be Chap.j. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajfertei, aao be the Author of that, by which (without the intervention of the mercy of Go J) mans mifery unavoidably falls uponhim. For with what Authority and Majefy doth God in the Scri- pture for hid dl\ manner of fin ? with what eamefinefs and im- fortuntty doth he wooe thefinner to forfake his fin ? with what loathing and dete/i-atpen doth he retention fin ? with ^^'\i•Sit j ufi ice and feverity doth he puniflj fm ? with what wrath and /»^/^. nation doth he threaten contumacious finners ? And is it pof- fible, (after all this and much more, recorded in the Scri- fturesy to exprefs the holmefs of God's nature, his hatred of Jin^ and his appointing a ^^j of judgment for the folemn pu- nifliment of finners ) to imagine that the Scriptures do in the leaft afcribe the Ongm of e'vil to Gci, or make him thQ Au- thor of Sin ? Shall not the judge of all the world do right ? will d. God of Infnite Jujlice, Furity, and Hdtnefs, puniffi the finner for that which himlelf was the caufe of i* Far be fuch unworthy thoughts from our apprehenficns of a Deity, much more of that God whom we believe to have declared his mind Co much to the contrary, that we cannot believe that and the Scrtpmres to be true together. ^ Taking it then for granted in the general, that God cannot SeB, ^.- ht Xht Author of fin, we come to en^jutre, whether the ac- 2, count which the Scripture gi'ves of the Origin of e vil, doth any way charge it upon God ? There are only two ways, accord- ing to jthe hijtory of the fall of man recorded in Scrtpttire^ whereby men may have any ground to cjuefiion whether God were the c^w,^ of mans fall ; either /r/, by t\\Q giz^mg him that pofitive Law, which was the occafion of his fall j or/e- _ condly, by leaving him to the liberty of his own will. Fir ft. The giving of that pofitive Law cannot be the leaft ground of laying man's fault on God \ becauie, I . It was mofi fuitahle to the nature of a rational creature to be governed by Laws, or declarations of the Will of his Maker.- For confidering man as a/-^^ agent, there can be no way imagined lb ccnfonant to the nature of man as this was, becaufe thereby he might, declare his obedience to God to be the matttr of his fee choice: For where there is a capacity of rev^ard, and pfAnijliment, and a^ing in t\\Q confidtration o^ l\\^m, there muft' be a declara- tion of the will of the Law-giver, according to which man may expeol either his reward or pnnpment. If it were >/-' M m m table .Vq Origims Sacra : Book III: tfi}k to God's nature to promife life to man upon ohedknce.^ it? "vyas not unfuitabk to it to exped obedience to every declarati- on of his 52^i// ; confidcring the ai^fdute foveraignty and <^<7- wimon.v^'hkh God had over-man as being his cre^/«r^, and^ the indifpenf^We obligation which was in the nature of manx to obey, whatever his Maker- did command him. So that^ God had full and. abfolute right, to require from man, what- he did as to the Law which he gave him to obey ; and in the general we cannot conceive, how there fhould be a teftimony of man s obedience towards his Creator^ without fome decla- ration of his Creator's Will. Secondly, God had full fower and authority^ not onlj to govern man by Lawsy but to deter- mine man''s ge?ieral obligation to obedience to that particular po- fitive precept by the breach of which man fell. If God's power over man was tmiverfal and unlimited^ what reafon can there be to imagine it fliould not extend to fuch ^pofttive Law f ■ Was it, becaufe the matter of this Law feemed too low for God to command hh creature ? but whatever the matter of the Law was, obedieiue to God w^as the great eW^of it, which- man had teftified as much in that Inflance of itas in any other whatfoever ; and in the 'violation of it were implyed thehigheft, aggravations oidij obedience ; for God*s power dX^di authority was as much contemned^hls goodnefs /lighted^ his Truth and faith- fulnejs ijuefiionedy his Name dijhonoured, his Majefiy affronted in the breach of that, as of any other Law whatfoever it had been. If the Law were eafie to be obferved, the greater was the fin of difobedience ; if the weight of the matter was not fo great in its felf, yet Gods authority added tht greatefi weight to it ; and the ground of obedience is not to be fetched from the nature of thQ thing requiredjbut from the authority of the Legtflator. Or was it then becaufe God concealed from man his counfel in giving of that pofitive precept ? Hath not then a Legtflator power to require any things but what he fattsfies tstvj one of his reafon in commanding it.^ if fo, what be- comes of obedieijce and fubjeBton ? it will be impoffible to^ make any probative precepts on this account ; and the Legijla- tor muft be charged with the difobedience of his fubje^s, where he doth not give a particular account of every thing wjiich he requires j which as it concerns humane Legijlators (who have not that ab(blu.te power and authority which God hath) Ghap. 3 . The Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted, '4 fi »hath) is contrary to all Laws' q^ Policy and the general lerife d^ kis'^iifen of the world. Thi'^ Flut arch gives a good account of, when ^^^^^^^ ''^ ' he difcourfeth fo rationally of the fobrmy which men ought '^'*^^^^' to ufe in their inquiries into the grou7tdi and reafons of Gird's atHons j for, faith he, Vhyficians Ti^ill give fr-ejcriptions iviihoiit giving the Vat tent a particular reafon of every cir cum fiance in -them \ «A* >S if? av^fa-Tnt /o^nf jj^vlcu, ri ^vhoytv a'7rheoi%x^^ x^ Neither have humane Lawi always apparent reajon for thew^ nayfciffe ^fthm, are to appearance ridiculous ; for which he inftanceth in tnat La7P of the Lacedemonian Epbori^ ^^ Tf^-^HY fivjziKA,to which no other reafon was annexed but this,^' TniOt^au 'mtf voiAoii aipAj '^\i7ro) com^v diTl'mAi-, fJlsTi r KO'jflV i^U 'Tb VOlXO^iT^y fJLYlT^ tIw AlTlAV (RiVnti IksLV^ <^ yfcc^o/u^av. Any one would eajily find many abfurdities in Lawsy who doth not conjider the intention of the Legijlator^ or the ground of what he requires. Tl J^^ Qctv[xctstv,{'3ikh. he,«i r rtVOfcj- 0) TJVt Koycp T^i /t^vTi^VyT^i 3 'T^^jTi^V T Allct^TAVQv]cov MKcL^^OIV, What wonder is it if w? are fo puz,led to give an account of -the aBions of men, that ive ^)ould be to feek as to thofe of the Deity ? This cannot be then any ground on the account of mere reafon, to lay the charge o^ man's difobedience upon God, becaufe he required from him the obfervance of that pofitive command of not eating of the forbidden fruit. The only thing then left, is^ v)hether God-h-not liable to s^[i ^^ this charge as he left man to the liberty of his will : And that may be grounded on two things ; either that God did not create man m fuch a condition^ in which it had been impojfible for him to have finned ; or that knowing his timptation he did not give him power to refjl it. If neither of thefe will lay any Imputation of the Origin of evil upon God^ then God will ap- "^earto be wholly />fe from it. Ftrjf^ concerning man's being created a free agent ; if the detemination of the Schools be good, thcLt poffibility ofjlnning is impUed ih the very notion of a M m r-a 2 creature 45rx Origtnes Sacra i Book III. Vid. Thorn, i.p. creature ; and confequently that impeccability \s repugnant to the 5-. 63. arf- f- . nature of a created Being ; then we fee a neceflary reafen, why ^titlTdiT ^^^ was created in ^ ftate oUibtrty : but endeavouring to y^^'^o/ fliew that the grounds of our Religion are not repugnant to natural reafon, I (hall rather make «/g of the Tefttmony of fuch who profefled to bQfollo7Pers of nothing elfe but reafon and ?hUo((ph). Among whom 1 (hall make choice of Sim- plicim both for thereafon he produceth,and becaufe he is far- theft from any iu^icim of partiality^ by reafon of his known oppofnion to the Mofaick Hijhry of the Creation. He theil in his Commentaries on EpiBttm profelfedly difputes this very flT^Ti^' ^ubjea of the Or(^i« of evil, and after having rejected that fond opinion of tvjo principles ^ one of ^ood, and the other of evil^ undertakes to give an account whence e-vil came into the world, v^hich becaufe it tends lb much to the lUufhating our prefent fubjei!!-, I iliall give an account of Gcd, faith he, 7vho is the fountain and principle of all good^ not only produced things which were in themfelves goody nor only thofe things o^hich were of a middle nature^ but the extreams too, which were fuch things which were apt to be perverted from that which is according to nature^to that which we call evil. And that after thofe bodies which 7Uere (as he fuppolethj incorruptible ^ Others were produced which are fubje^ to mutation and corruption \ (ind jo after thofe fouls which were immutably fixed in good, others were produced 7vhich were liable to be perverted from it \ that fo the riches of Gcd's goodnefs might be dij^layedin snaking to exifi" ^11 beings which are capable of it ; and that theTJniverfe might he perfeB in having all forts of Beings in it. Now, he fuppoleth, that all thoje Beings 7vhich are above this fublunary world are fuch as are immutably good, and that the loyvefi fort of Beings which are liable to be perverted to evil, are fuch which are here belo7i^ Therefore, {kith he, the foul being of a more noble and immutable nature, while it is by its felf, doth not partake of evil ; but it being of a nature apt to be joyned 7vith thefe ter- reft rial bodies (by the providence of the author of the Univerfe^ who produced fuch fouls, that fo both extrea?ns might be joyned by the bonds of vital union) thereby it becomes fenfible of thofe e^ils and pains which the body is fubjcii to-, but theje things are not properly evils but rather good,conjideri?jg our terre/lrial bodies as parts of the Univerje which is upheld by the changes and vi- cifitudes: Chap.j. Ti;e Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted. 45^1 cijjitudes 'which are in this lower world : Which he largely difcouries on to (hew that thofe particular alterations which are in bodies, do conduce rather to the perfetttcn and beauty of the U^iverfej than are any real ez^tls in it. But now, faith he, for the origin of thoje things which are properly euils^ viz. moral evils ^ which are to. 't Av^cdrnvM •^V'^i •nldL[^ caufe of all evil in thf foul mu etuTo^h'H yj.^o a,uT» ^?Ji KitniyoLi Ti KAt ayiivAt. For though the foul be of a kind of Am- phibious nature, yet it is not forced either upwards or down- wards , but acts either way according to its internal liberty. But, faith he, lE^Mtf the rational foul keeps that power ii^hicL it hath in its hands over the body, and makes ufe of it only as an infirument for. its own good-, fo long it keeps pure and free from any fain of evil ; but when it once forgets th fimtlitude it hath . w-ith the. more excellent Being, ^^A\ freedom o{ action. So that while we enquire after the Origin of e'vtl we have no other caufe to affign it to but man's abul^ of \}^2Xfrte power of aifling which he had ; but if we Will befo curious as to enquire further, why God did create man with fuch 2i freedow of wtll, and not rather /.v his foul immutably ongood'\ if the W^r of heivgs be no fa- tisfadory reafon for it, we can give no other than that why he made man , or the world at all,which was the good fleafure of his Wi'd. But fecondly, fnffojing God^s giving man this freedom of ^^Q^ j wU^ doth not: entitle him to he the author of evil ; doth not his leaving man to this Uberty of his in the temptation^ make htm the caufe of fin ? I anfwer no, and that on- thcfe ac- counts. I. Becaufe man ftood then tif on fuch terms ^th at he couldnot fall hut by his own free and voluntary aEi ; he had a power to ftand, in that there was no principle of corYupt'ion at all in h\s facul^ t ies jhuth^hzd ^ pure and' undefiled foul which could not hQ pol- luted wi±out its own conjent : Now it had h^m repugnant to the terms on which man ftood (which were the tryal of his cbedknce to his Creator) had he been irrefiJHhly determined any way. SimpUcws puts this queftion after the former dlfcour fc, Whether God may not he called the author of fin j hecaufe he permits the foul to ufe her liberty ? but, faith he, he that fays God fhould not have permitted this ufe of its freedom to the foul ^ mufi fay one of the fe two things y either that the foul being of fuch a nature as^ is indifferent to good or evil, it ^ould have been wholly kept from the choofing evil, or elfe that It jbould have been made of fuch a nature that it fhould not have had a^power of choofing evil. Thefirfi is irrational and abfurdr, far what freedom and liberty had that been where there was no choice ? and what choice could 'there have been where the mind was necefjitated only to one fart ? For the fecond 7ve are to confi- J^r,faith he,f-^^^ no evil is in it felfdefirahle,or to be chofen ; hut v^ithal, if this power of determining^ it f elf either way muft he taken aw-ay^ tt^mufi be either asfomething not good, or as feme, great evil ^ and whoever fdtth fo, doth not con fider, how many things inthe world there are, which are accounted good anddefira- hie things, yet are ?w ways ^omf arable 7i^itb this freedom offVilL- For 45'-hich was fo necefj'ary in the order of the Univerfe, we have no reafcn to attribute the Origin of that evil to God which comes by the abufe cf that liberty. For, as he further adds, God doth not at all caufe that averfion from Good, which is m the foul when it fins y but only gave fuch a power to the foul, whereby it might turn it felf to evil, cut of which God might after^ Par' iS6 i^'','^^^ds produce fo much good, which could not otherwife have been without it So confonantly to the Scripture doth that Thilofophtr fpcak on this fubjedt. 2. God cannot be I aid to be the author of fin, though he did not prevent the fall of man, becaufe he did not withdraw before his fall any grace 6r ajfifiance, which was necejjary for his fiandmg. Had there been indeed a neceffity of fupernatural grace to be communicated to man for every moment, to con- tinue him in his Innocency, and had God before mans fall with- ! drawn fuch ajfifiance from him, without which it were tmpofii-^ \ ble for him to have ftood, it would be very difficult freeing I God from being the caufe of the Fall of man But we are not put to fuch difiiculttes for aofuitting God from being the author of fin ', for there appears no necejfity at all for ajjerting any diHinCtion of (ufiicient zr\d efiicaciom grace in man before his Fall ', that the one (hould belong only to a radical power of (landing, the other to every ad of good which Adam did ; For if Gcd made man upright , he certainly gave him fuch a power as might be brought into att without the ne- cejfityoi zny fuperventent aSl of g^ace, tO elictte that habitual power into particular anions. If the other were Jufficient it I Chap. J. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures afferte^. 45" 7 it was fufficient for its end ; and how could ithQ /uficient for its end, i'f notwithftanding that, there were no pojjibility oifiand- ingy unleis efficacious help were faperadded to it ? God would not certainly require any thing from the creature in his inte^ grity^ but what he had a power to obey ; and if there were we- ceJJ'ary further ^r Origmes Sacra : 7# Book IIL thefe clouds and ^adows^ inftead of that real ^^o J which is the true objedt of the foul's delire ? They could eafily iee there was no fure, unmixed ^00^ in the world, but there was a contemfc- ration of both together, according to that of Euripides : OCk AV 'j^oflo ^i(C^U i^^tt ^ KA}^, n^ere is a kind of continual mixture of good and evil in the ivorld^ which Socrates obferved upon the rubbing of his thigh flai. in PUd. where the fetters made it itch, j ^ atittov Z avS^^i^ , 'htKi r/ V^ Avliov u)y TO KvTn^eh ; ^^^^ ^ ftrange thing is that which men are ivont to call fleafure ? how near of kin is it to that which feems fo contrary to ity. pain ? Si^. % Now the obferving the Itrange and fiidden viciffitudes of thefe things, and what near neighbours pain and pleafurev^tx^ to each other , ( fo that there is frequently a paiTage out of ©ne into the other) did yet more entangle them to gij^^ clear account of the origin of both thele. Thole who bel^^ there was a God , who produced the world and ordered all things in it , did eafily attribute whatever was z^ood in the world to the Fountain of "d^goodnef^ but that any evilfliouldi come trom him they thought it repugnant to the very notion- ©f a Deity ; which they were fb far right in , as it concerned the evil oifin ; which we have already (hewed God could not be the author of ; but therein they fliewed their ignorance of the true caufe of evil^ that they did not look upon the mile^ ries of life as effeOs of God's Jufiice upon the world for the evil q{ fin. And therefore that they might fet the origin of evil far enough off from God^ they made two different Princi- fles oi things , the one of good ^ and the other of evil-y this Plutarch tells US was the moft ancient and univcrfai account which he could meet with of the origin of good and evil. To- which purpofe we have this ample 'teflimony of his in his Pluttrch de l^^^^^icd difcourfc, de Ifide & Ofiride ^ A/© i^ 7m^-m\AtQ- aCvi Ijide & 0/ir. }{J.Tei3-iv *«. ^oKoy^v }^ vofio^'^, ^i 7? ttd/MtwV J|9 (ptKoffip^i Jh'^A , |». 369. ed. Fr. t\jj^ a^X*^*^ Ajiffwojoy 'ix^'^y tvv 0 '^^v '^^V ^ *f^cn^d\ei7if»Vy ^k Iv^ fiifnijof aif^fUTM ttJ AvntMra to Tmy, »t« ^i b^v 0 Ke^^oiv i^ KAjev* Chap.3. the Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted. 461 ^vaVi aC:t^A/X>W< J)ctVY)f^V a.VeiLKi^yVV(nV Yluiv , C6A.A.' ATO J)jiiy cvd^rtav df^v f Kott J\j{iv avIi'ttclKc^v Suvd^cov ^ 'f' tuv ^ ra A^tA Keti kaT ivd^iioM •^fiyii[/.rivttf, '^ '5 'iy.'TrAKiv dvA^fup^tni; koX dyetKKaouft o 71 ^iQ- fMx!]o{f o n koj^jl^ u kai ftw Twiiy ctAA' 6 th- TA^OhAi 'KA^^i (Nkb^Q- ' c] y^ isj^y AVAl]iCOi TTi^pVKi yiVi^t, a\' 'fi(i» 3 v.AiL^ r dy'^v ^k ay y^ f^^'^i > <^s' -^v^^v \S'idLv kai a^'xJjjjv a^'TTi^ A}^^^ KAI KAKv, tIuj r^wc^; what Animals were good and ulcfull they afcribed to Oromafdes, and all venomous and noxi- ous ones to Arimanim , whom Plutarch elfewhere calls r to- VY)^v ^ctifjudva. Ili§miV, the evil Daemon of the Perjians. The Plut. in jfletc. fame Di'genes Laertim relates of the Magi, the Philofophers of Diog. Laertiw p^yfia, that they made two diftin^ principles, 'Ayt^v ^ai/mva ^Ph'hfoph '^'^ ^ ^ctm, a good and bad Damon \ for which he quotes Di- von, Ari^oth, Hermippus, Eudoxm, and others. ' The fame Plutarch makes to be the opinion of the ancient Greeks y who attri- Chap. 3. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures aj^erted, 4^j attribute the ^W ta Jupiter Olympi^ts , the had to Hades\ the CoaUtuns, faith he, m^^ke the tlanets their Gods, of which two they fuppofe the caufe of good ; two more of only, a malignant influence , and other three to be indifferent to ei- ther. The fame he affirms of the rAigyptans , that whatever was ci;// znd t-'^egular ^ they afcrlbed to T^'pho \ what was good, comdy and ujefuU, they attributed to IJij and O fir is ; to Jfts as the p^l/i've, Ofiru as the ath've principle. Thus we fee how large a_^re^ithis opinion of the origin SeSl 10* of evil had in the Gentile world ; neither did it expire with Beathemfm ; but Manes retained fo much of the Religion ©f his Countrey, being a Verftan, that he made a ftrange med- ley of the Verfian and Chnftian dodrine together. For that was his famous opinion , of which St. Aufiin tells us ; Ifte duo principici inter [& diver] a at(jue adverfa , eademcjue ater^ na, d^ CO- sterna, hoc efi^ femper fuij/e, compofuit ; duaf^ue na- turas atcfue fuhftantiaf^ honi , fcilicet , d^ malt, fequens alios antioiuos hareticos, cpinatus efi. St: Auji-in thinks that Ma- -^^i^-ft- ^'^ ^^- nes had his opinion concerning two principles from the an- ^^^' ^' '^^' cient Heretic ks , by whom I fuppofe he means the Marci- ontfls and Valentinians ; but it feems more probable that Manes had his dod^rine immediately from his Countreymen, though it be generally thought that Scythianm and Ruddas were his Mafiers in it. But from whomfoever it came , the opinion w^as merely Heathen, and not more contrary to Scripture than it is to Reafon ; the former I meddle not with , that opinion being now extindt in the Chriftian world ; 1 only briefly conilder the umeafonahlenejl of it ; to fliew what a far better account of the origin of evil the Scriptures give us , than was difcovered by the Heathen Vhilofophers.. For on both fides that opinion is repugnant to the notion of a Deity , fo that while they w^ould make two fuch Gods,. they make none at all. For how can the principle of good" • be God , if he hath not Infinite power, as well ^s goodnefi? and how can he have Infinite povjer , if he hath not the ma- nagement of things in the world ? and how can he have the management of things, if they be liable to evil, which the other 0-0 J, which is the principle of evil, may lay upon it ; from which, according to this fuppoution, tlie principle of" good cannot refcue it ? So that they who hold this opi- nLoa. 4^4 " Origines Sacra :. Book III. nion cannot , as SimfUcms tells us , give God to ^(ju^v ^ %Kn; Jhvcl:xiaf, the half of that infinite pwer which belongs to him ; for neither can he keep the good creatures which he makes from the fo-wer of the e^il Damon , and therefore if he loves them, muft be in continual /e^r/ of the power of the contrary principle ; neither can he free them from the evil which the other lays upon them j for then Gcd's power would be far greater than the evil Damons^ and fo he could be no Anti'God, And on the other fide the notion or Idea of an Infinite evil Beings is in its felf an inconfifient Idea ; for it is an Infinite non-entity, if we fuppofe his very Being to lie in Being evil, which is only a privation of goodnefs ; and befides if he be Infinitely evil, he muft be infinitely con- trary to the good Principle 5 and how can he be infinite- ly contrary which enjoys fieveral of the fame per fe^ ions, which the other hath, which are infinity of ejjence and m- cefiity of exifience ? Now if this Principle of evil be abfb- lutely contrary to the other, it muft be contrary in all his perfedlions ; for whatever is a perfeBion, belongs to that which IS good ', and now if it be contrary in every perfection, In- finity of ejjcnce, and Necefiity of exifience, being two, it muft be as contrary as is imaginable to them, by which this evil Prin- ciple muft be infinitely defSive in being and exifience , and fo it will bean iiifimte non-entity which yet exifis , which is •the height 0^ ccntradi5lion. Again, if there be liich a contra- ry principle, which is the caufe of all evil, then all evil falls out unavoidably , and by the power of this infinitely evil prin- ciple , by which means not only all Religion , but all vertue and goodnefs will be taken out of the world, if this evil prin- ciple be infinite', and if not infinite, no Anti-god : and not on- ly fo, but all difference of good and evil will betaken away ( and then what need making two fuch contrary principles to give an account of the origin of evil ?) for when once evil be- comes thus necefiary, it lofeth its nature as a moral evil j for a moral evil implies in it a voluntary breach of fome known Law ; but how can that breach be voluntary, which was cau- fed by an Infinite po7uer in the moft proper way of efficiency ? And thus if all freedom of will be deftroyed ( as it is necefe- rily by this fuppofition ) then no Government of the world by Laws can be fuppofed , and confequently no reward or funijh- chap. 3 . The Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted, 465' funijljment, which fuppole //^^r// of adion, and by this means ail Religion, Lawsy and Frovidence are banirtied out of the world, and fo this evil Damon will get all into his own hands, and inftead of two contrary principles, there will be but one infinitely evil Damon, Which that there is not^ appears by this, that notwithftanding all the evil in the world, there is fo much good left in it, of which there would be none, if this evil Damon had Infinite fower. By this we fee there cannot be a principle infinitely evil ; for while they go about to make two fuch contrary ^r incifi.es infinite, they make neither of them fo, and fo while they make two Gods^ they take away any at all. So that this opinion of the Origin of evil^ is manifeftly ahfurd, irrational J and contradiBions, But all the Heathen Fhtlofcphers were not fb grofs as to SeB. ii. imagine two fuch Anti-gods with infinitely active power ; but yet thoje who would not in terms afiert it,might be driven to it by the confequence of their opinion concerning the Origin of evil J which did fuppofe Rneceffity of it in nature, as flowing from that pajfive pnnciple out of which the world was pro- duced. Hence it was that HeracUtm as Plutarch tells us, at- tributed the Origin of all things to difcord ^nd antipathy^ and was wont to fay,«ithat when Homer willied Deiftd.& oj?^ ^ ' riae. that aU contention ivere hantjhed out of the world, that he did lecretly curfe the Origin of things, and wiflied the rutn of the world. So Empedncles called the a£tive principle which did good Harmony and Friendjhip^ but the other by which he makes it to be a ^udrrelfome ^ pernicious ^ and hloody principle. The fame Flutarch tells US of thole two re- nowned Philofophers, Pythagoras and Plato, Thence he tells us the Pythagoreans called the principle of good, ro %v ^m'^ffi^ctQ-. ^JiyoVy TO fxiyov, to iv^, to 'srsf/urcV, jro TiT§ci')ayoVj Ts> th^toy, ri Afit/z'^foi'. Unity^ finite, qmefcent, ftraight^ uneven number^ fefuare^ right and fpkndid -, the principle of evil, they called tIo) e/V:tc/i&, T9 ATTHfJVjTV ^ >uvnvKiiy d^x^u, a confufed infinite y felf-moving , fiirring principle ; which (faith he) he elfewhere calls Necejfity, and in his de Legibm plainly, 4'^')^v a^TetiClov }^ KetMTniov, a diforderly and malignant Souly which cannot be underftood of mere matter, when he makes his Hy/g Af^^ipoy )^ d^f^vs^v >^ Trdcmf TroiOTTflQ- acti Slfvdwicoi oiK^Af %qit)uoVy ^ Without form or figure , and defiitute of all qualities an^ fower of operation : and it is impoffible (faith he) that that Tvhich is of it felf fuch an inert principle as matter rs,Jliould by Plato be fuppofed to be the caufe and priijciple of evil, which he dlewhere calls dvdyKlM 7P)Khd tJ Oew ^(nict'x^Jidl^iigoodnefsf\( God's power could not hinder it, it deftroys his ommpotency. So that by this opinion God mull *• cither be 2iflave or a friend to evil. 1. This principle over^ turns the foundations of Religion, and all tra?ifaB'ions between God and mens fouls in order to their welfare ^ becaufe it makes evil N Chap.J- ^^ot the leaft latisfad^ion in point of realbn for acquitting God from being the Author ofy?^,nor for clearing the true Or/^i« of e^iL SiB. 13. Thus we have now compared the account given of it in Scri- pture^ with that given by the Heathen Thilofophersy and find it in every thing more clear, rational and fatisfa^ory than theirs is. W hich doubtlefs is the reafon, why the more mo- dern Vkilofophers^ fuch as Hierocles^ Vorphyrie^ Simplicim and others, though other wife great oppoftrs of Chrifiianity, did yet in ihxsfide with the Scriptures and attribute the original of e%fil not to matter but to the Will of man. And whoever is ferioufly converfant with the writings of thofe Fhilofophers, who were ^ '^ ''-^^ ifJioii of thQ fa ered fuccejjlon, out of the School of Ammontus at Alexandria, fuch as Plotinus, Torphy- rius, Jamblichus and Hierocles, will find them write in a higher , firain concerning many jpeighty and important truths, as of the degeneracy of mens fouls from God , and the jvay of the foMls returning to him, than the moft fublime of the ancient Fhilofophers h^ddont. Which Jpeculations of thtlvs no douh arofe not fo much from the School of Flato^ and Pythagoras^ as of that great reftorer of Fhilofophy Ammofjius of Alexan^ dria ; whofe Scholars Herennius, Origen and Plotinus were, Eufi'h. Ecchf. Who living and dying a Chriliian, as Eufebius and Hierom af^ ^^7/ /. 6.^.19. fure» us, whatever Porphyrms fuggefts to the contra- Hierony. de j-y^ (j}j communicate to his Scholars the fublimeri^//^r/>j of 'vh^&^'ript ^^'^^■^^ Revelation, together with tht fpeculations of the-anci- Por^byr.c.C. ' ^^t Philofophers : which Holfienms conceives he did with an adiuration of fecrecy, which he tells US Porphyrius himfelf ac- knowledgeth, that thofe three Scholars of Ammonius, Heren- nius^ Ortgen and Flotinus, were under an obligation to each o- ther not to reveal and difcover, though it were after ^violated by them. It is an eafie matter to conceive what an excellent improvement might be made of the ancient Platonick Philofo- phy by the advantage of the Scriptures, by one who was fo well verfed in both of them as Ammonius is fuppofed to have been ; and how agreeable and becoming would- that Phtlofophy feem which had only its nfe from Flato, but its height zudimprove- ment from thole rich and truly divine Truths which were in- laid with them ? The want of obfcrving this, 'viz,. whence it was that thofe excellent difcourfes in the latter Platonifts had Chap.j. 'fhe Divine Authority of the Scriptures afferted. 471^ had their true original^ hath given occafion to feveral miftakes among learned men : as firft the over-valuing of the Vlato- mck Thilofofhy^ as though in many of the dtfcourfes and no- tions of it, it ieemed to fome (who were more in love with Philofophy than the Scriptures) to out-goe what is difcove- red therein concerning the fame thmgs. A moft grctmdlefs and unworthy cenfure ! when it is more than frobahle ("and might be largely manifefled , were it here a fit opportunity) that whatever is truly generous and noble in the fublimefl difcourfes of the Platomfisj had not only its primitive rife, but its ac- cejjlon and imfro'vement from the Scriptures wherein it is ftiil contained in its native lufire and beauty^ without thofe pain- tings and im^m^mixtures which the fublimeft truths are cor- rupted with in the Vlatonick Writings, The reafon of w^hich is, though thefe Phihfophers grew fuddenly rich through the fpoils they had taken out of the Scriptures, yet they were loth. to be known^ from whence they had them, and would feem to have had that out of their own gardens which w-as only tranfplanted from the Sacred writings. Therefore we find them not mentioning the Scriptures and the Cjorifiian doctrine without fome contempt of its meannefs and fimplicity ; and whatever improvement they had gained by them, they would have it lefs taken notice of by profefling their oppofnion to the Chri/}ians, as is notorious in thofe great Phdofophers, Vorphy- rim, Jambluhusy Hierocles^Simplictus and others. It being-, their defign to take lb much and no more out of the Chn- fiian Do^rtne as they could well fuit with their Vlatonick jw* tions, by which means they fb difguifed thQ faces of the Truths they ftole, that it w^ere hard for the right owners of them to know them again. Which was the grand artifice of their great Mafter Flato^ w4io dou-btlefs by means of his abode and acquaintance in «/, the Origin oi the world, than -many other Gr^^^^ Thilofophers had ; but yet therein lay his great fault, that he wrapt up and difguifed his notions in fuch ^ fabulous and ambiguous manner, that partly it might be lefs known from whence he had them,and that they might find better entertain- ment among the Greeks, than they \^'ziere.ever like to do in their plain 471 Plato in Epi- nom. J^ol eak agreeable to the ScYiptureSy either they do not oivn TV hence they had it, or turn it (]mte another vjay, whereby they have done the truth a great deal of injury, by mixing it ivith their ccrruptions of it, and making that little truth a plea for the refi of their errors. Neither was this only among the anci- ent Vhdvfiphers^ but the Primitive Chrifiians began to dilcern the under-hand workings of fuch, who fought to blend Philo- fophy and Chriftianity together \ for Tertullian himfelf takes great notice of fuch, who did Fcritatis dogmata ad Philofcphi- cas fententias adulterare, fuborn Chriftianity to maintain Phi- lofophyj which makes him cry out,Fiderint qiiiStoicum,& Pla- tonicum,d>' DialeBicum Chrifiianifmum protulerunt ; by which adverf b^ret. vvc fcc what tampering there was betimes rather to bring Cbri- ^''•^' ^* fiianity down to PhiloJophy,th^n to make PhiJofophy truckle un- der the truth dihd fimplic it y of thQ Scriptures. Whether Ammo- nuts himfelf, and ibmc others of the School oi Alexandria, might be guilty in this kind, is not here a place to enquire, though it be too evident in the Writings of fome, that they rather feek to accommodate the Scriptures to the Senti- ments of the School of Plato, than to reform that by the Scri- ptures ; but I fay, however it were with thofe who were Chrifiians, yet thofc who were not, but only Phdofophers, made De Profcrip. y^ chap. 3 . The Divine Authority of the Scriptures affertecL 473 made their great advantage by it. For when they found what was reconcilable with the Doiirme of Plato in the Scriptures, done already to their hands, by the endeavours chiefly of Am- monhts and Origen^ they greedily embrace thofe improvements of their Fhtlofophy, which would tend fo much to the credit ' of it, and as contemptuoufly rejed what they found irrecon- cilabk with the dictates of their Phdofophy, Now what an unreasonable thing is it , when whatever was noble and excel- lent in the Heathen Vhtlojophy was derivative from the Scrip- tures^ as the facred Fountain'oVxt^ that the meeting with fuch things fhould in the leaft redound to the prejudice of the Scriptures from w^hence it was originally derived ? when on the other iide it fhould be a great confirmation to our faith , as to the Scriptures^ that they who were profefled Philofophers and Admirers only of reafon , did fo readily embrace fome of thole grand Truths which are contained in the Word of God, For which we need no other infiance^ than that before us, Se6l, 14.- concerning the ongm oi evil ^ the making out of which will tend to the clearing the lafi thing mentioned concerning it , which was, That the mofi material things in it areattefied by the Heathens themfelves. And this -honey which is gained out of the Lion?, mouth , muft needs tajle fweeter than any other doth. For it is a weak and groundleis mi(lake on the other fide , which is the fecond ( which arifeth from meeting things confbnant to the Scriptures in the Writings of Philofophers ) prefently to conclude from fuch things, that they were Chri- fiians (as it is faid fome have lately done in the behalf of H/- erocles, ) For there being fuch clear accounts given in Scrip- ture of the grand difficulties and perplexities which the minds of men were troubled with, when thefe came to the know- ledge of fuch who were of Philofophick and Inc^mfitive heads, we cannot but think they would meet with acceptation among them, efpecially if they might be made confident with their iormtv J}>eculations, Thus it was in our prefent cafe concern- ing the origin of evtl, we have already beheld the lamentable perplexities the ancient Philofophers were in about it, what Me- anders they were loft m for want of a due to guide them through them ; now it pleafed God, after the coming of OSr//? • 1 in thQfle(hj to declare to the world the only way for the reco- ' P p p very 474 Origines Sacra : Book Ilf. ^ very of fouls^ and their eternal jalvattov^ the news of which being fpread fo far that it foon got among the Philofophers , could not but make them more inofuifitt'ue concerning the (late and condition of their fouls, and when they had fearched what the Philofvfhers had formerly difcovered of it, their curiofity would presently prompt them to lee what account of things concerning the [ouh of men was delivered by the Preachers of this Bew cloBnns, By this they could not but prefently un- derftand that they declared all men's fouls to be in a moft dege- nerate and low conditim , by being fo continually under the power of the moft unreafonable and unruly paffions, that they were eftranged from God^ and prone to fix on things very unfui- table to their nature, as to all which, their own inward fence and experience could not but tell them that thefe things were notorioufly true ; and therefore they enquire further how thefe things came to be fo ; which they receive a full .account of in Scripture, that man's /o^/ was at firft created fure and holy ^ and in perfed friendjMp with God, that God dealt bountifully and favourably with man ; only expeded obedience to his Laws ; that man being a/r^e agent, did abufe his liberty, and difoheyed his Maker ; and thence came the true ^^se^ppJ^^^ , the feathers of the foul, whereby it foared up to Heaven, moulted away, and the foul funk below its felf into a degenerate and apoflate condi- tion, out of which it is impoffible to be recovered without fbme extraordinary exprejflon of Divine Fa'vour. Now what is there in all this account, but what is hugely fuitable to pri?jciples of reafon, and to the general experience of the world, as to thole things which were capable of being tryed by it ? And thole Thilofophers who were any thing ingenuous , and Lovers of truth , could not but confefs the truth of thofe things which we are now fpeaking of , vix,. Thdt mens fouls are in a 'very Regenerate condition. That the mofi rational account of it is , That man by the aEl of his own will brought himfelf into it ; and that in order to the happinefi of men'^s fouls , there was a necefftty of recovery out of this condition. SeB. 1 5[. ^^ ^0 the degeneracy of the fouls of men •, This was the Com- I. mon complaint of thofe Thilofophers , who minded the govern- ment of themfelves, and the practice of vertue, elpecially of the Platonifis and Stoicks, Seneca in all his moral Difcour- fes, efpecially in his Epiftles, may fpeak fufficiently in behalf of . . the Chap. 3 . The Divine Authority of the Scriptures aJferteJ, 4 7^ the Stoicks^ how much they lamented the degeneracy of the world. And the Platomfis all complain of thQ Jla'verj/ of the foul in the body, and that it is here by way of pumjhmenpy for fomething which was done before ; and which makes me fome- what inclinable to think , that Plato knew more of the lapfe o( mankind^ than he would openly difcover ; and for that end dilguifed it after his ufual manner in that hjfothejts of pr^-ex- i/l-ence, which taking it C ah haUfiicall^ ( for I rather think the opinion of pra-extjlence is fo to be taken, than the hifiorj of the fall of man ) may import only this, That mensfcuh might he juftly fuppofed to he created happj, httt hy reafon (f the Apofi a- fis of man^i foul from God , all Souls come now into their ho' dies as into a kind of .prifon^ they heing enflaved to the hrutijh part within them , there having heen fuch a true 7f^i^f>pviic]s vendcav y{oo(^^ , 077 70 d-MV )^ eLKii^oVy }^ Iv -mcnv et^Act^ii azo^iv » Svva^.^. Let us at the leaft 'join with our Fore-fathers in lamenting this , that we are corn- founded of fuch difagreeing and contrary principles , that we are not able to preferve divine , pure and unfpotted Innocency, And Hi^rocles fully exprelTeth his fence of the degeneracy of Hiercc. i»Py^ mankwd, in thefe words ; ol ^ 'Trhii^t kclkoI ^9 t^ 's^v'^dL^iUi 'Trap Iciv^ rh kamv fe)c«v , J)eii to (^^K^^hZcu (pvynv dyd ©s? > kaI yvV'i ' ^ 3^ 6t77c 02? "^^eKr^oy (^KattjovIa w (pfivAi ii ir^; yiuj ksuow tAfAiy 3 r lyidvcoy fiiov ' We live their death) and die their life : }{J.Ti, yi) I^l ri ^fi Pag. 258. isV^^eo'Tni iaiA <^ 71 de^ vovyjay r ^ov> Jy r^ jU^J^iTToji voeiv 7n(pvK0' vcLfjJ.^13- ohi^iuSj^it. Man $ nature lying between thofe beings which verfetually contemplate God^ and thofe which are unca- 'p able of it ^ it fometimes afcends to thofe ^ and fomcttmes de- fcends to thefe, according as it obferves or reje^s the dictates of reafon^ and fo by reafon of the indifferency of the will is liable to take upon it the Jtmilitude of God or a beafi, T*Ct' h 0 Tne). '? •S-fWTo/, )t} Tmi Thvif^vii ^ laiKcLVZi r iavp^ ct/ft^cr/ ytvovjou. jind who ever throughly ccnjiders this y will eafily under ft and ^ how men are the caufes of their own emls^ and become unhappy and mtferable 'through their own choice and felf wills. Which he brings in by way of explication of that truly golden Vythagore- ^^Verfe, Men are grown mtferable through their own fault. And after^ wards Hierocles excellently defcribes the nature'of eW inthele words, ^1^ '^ CVlJi(fiV^i C?tt<* Xj ^KTlfloV YlfJUV V^YJiV, W "tS Ct VTlf »^« ''^^ ^^(nv y!{V'A7ii. Both cur natural and contracted fra'vity^' is no- thing clfe but the unnatural motion of cur free wills : according to which, faith he, Ivavm^t tcTj -d-iion vof^n ^mt^u^,^, iS'lv i- • /MPOU '7«T0 TVtpKcOi Oncovin J 077 iJhl'Yl^.U^V a,(pVld ^' ^**- acknowledge the neceffity oi^-way of recovering fouls, w^hich ^' ^^' fhould be univerlal. Cum autem dicit Porphyrias , Nondum receptam unam c^uandam feBam , qua univerfalem viam ani- ma cmtineat liheranda, ■ mnduryic^^ue in fuam notitiam eandem viam hiftoriali cogn'itione perlatam , proculdubio confi- tetur ejje alicjuam, fed nondum in fuam ventjje notitiam. But the neceffity of the purgation of the foul in order to its felici- ty, is fo largely and fully difcourfed of by all the Vlatomjls and Pythagm-eans , that it will be needlefs to infift upon it. Thus far then we find the account given of the ongm of evil in Scripture to be embraced by th^fublimef of the Heathen Phi- lofophers, as moil rational and fattsfaBory \ which was the thing to be proved. Neither do we find only the main of this account acknow- ^^^^ j^^ ledged as rational , but we may trace fome not obfcure foot- fieps of the truth of the particular circumstances which con- cern the fa^ of man , among the Heathens : fuch as the De- *virs envying of man s happinef , his dif gulfing himfelf under the form of a Serpent , and man s being thrown out of Para- dife upon his fall. I. The Devil^s envying the happinefi of man. It hath been DCafaub.Oti' truly obferved by a learned man, that the original of that ve- g^"^j of ten> . ry ancient opinion among the Heathen , de invidia Da?nonis , ^°^^ ^^^ '' had its rife from the hifory of the fall of man, which he hath made out fo fully, that I fhall the "lefs need to prove it. And that there was an undoubted tradition of fome malignant Jpi- tits , which envyed the welfare of mankind , appears by that ample Teftimony of Plutarch, in his Dio , mentioned by the. fame Author^ OuV oTJk, u.n •^ Trxw 'XAhcum ^ drtTrz^Tc^jcv d^ 480 Orighes Sacne : Book IIL TiKivjriu 'vj-)^(riv. V tut arch was much troubled to give an ac- count of the apparitions which Bruttts and Dlo , who were learned and fhilofofhicJ men , were haunted withall ; and doubts he can give no juft account of it , unlefs he embraced that very ancient tradition (which yet leemed ahfurd and in- credthhy ) viz. That there are certain wicked and malignant Damons^ which envy goodmen^ and v/ithfiaud their enterpriz,esy by raijing fears and trcuhles to the?n^ that fo they might hinder them in their furfuit of^ertue ; lefi, if they continue (hdfaft and unmoveahle in good , they flwuld he at lafi partakers of greater felicity than they enjoy. There being then fb ancient a tradition of fuch v^ejL^cii S'aj^vi^, (as the learned man mentioned hath more fully (hewed in his notes on this place of Plutarch , ) gives a great confirmation to the truth of what the Scripture reports concerning the Devil's being Co great an Infirument in procuring the fall of man. To him therefore I referr the in- quifitive Reader , and (hall not add to the Tefiimonies of him Plutarch, de I- citcd , that of Xenocrates in Plutarch , de IJide d^ OJiride , fid. & Qfir. where he faith that the calamities of life and misfortunes men p. 3^'- n-jeet with, do not agree with that veneration which we have forthQ Deity ^ndgood f^irits J 'Aaa' ilj (pvji^ Iv t$ 'z^'^^yji i^.iy^- But th.it there are in the air jome great and potent Beings^ which are of a furly and malignant nature^ and re Joyce to doe lamhlichui de men all the mif chief they can, lamhlichm , in his anfwer to myjhr. p. 105. porphyrins concerning the -Egyptian Myiieries, undertakes to give an account of thefe Qvilfpirits or daemons , and that from them the origin of evil in the world is ; for thus he fpeaks ( as he is tranflated by Ficinns ) Si verum efi quod de Idolis dicehamus , improbif^ue D^^monihm , hinc fane exoritur multi- plex origo malorum. Simulant enim Deorum prafentiam^ da^ monmncjue honor um , ideocjue cultorem fuum juhent efje fuftum , tit ipfi vide ant ur honi, ficut dr Dii; cjuoniam vero natura funt maliy rogati r^ala inferre^ lihenter inferunty atc^ue nobis ad in- jufla conducunt. Hi funt omnino qui c^ in oracuUs mentiuntur C^ fallunt, e^ turpia confolunt atque peragunt. By which we fee he acknowlcdgeth fome fpirits whofe natures are wicked , and help men to doe evil ; and that thefe very fpints may fometimes Chap. 3. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajjerted: '481 fometimcs command that which is good^ left they fliould be fuf- pe£ted,to be what they are, of a wicked and malignant Nature, which only defign the rum of men.By which we have a good ac- count of whatever was commendable delivered by the Heathen oracles, which yet might come from the Devil ftill, by this confeffion of Jamhlkhm himfelf. For the Devils a^ fearing under the form of a Serpent , It IS S^^» 1 8. very probably conjedured, that from hence it was that the ^' Trmce of thofe who contended with Saturn,\w?is by that ^^nig- matical writer Pherecydes Cjrim called 'o^/oi/euj. Cdfus who had fo little skill in antiquity as to think that the Hijiory of Mofes was as to many paflfages of it taken out of Heathen Fables fm^\^% on this very ftory of Ophioneus as the ground- work of that relation in Genefis concerning the FfJl. But On- o;en well anfwers Inm.^ es^^^', ei iyacthZv iiuiv ui (Ti ^ AV^^C^TnV TllCtVTU nVCt aiVlK^TAl, iTTAyyiKiA '3-«-T«7©' }^ (yLH^OyO)V For the Serpent (from which Ophioneus m Pherecydes derived his name) which was the azufe why man was caft forth of Pa- radife, doth intimate fome fuch things while under a pretence of Divinity^ and of a better condition, he firjl deceived the jpoman, and by her ?neans the man. Colitis Rhcdiginus calls this Ophionem Damcntcum Serpentem^ qui antefgnanus fue- ^^^^•^'^-'^- '•2' rit agminis a Divine mentis placito deficient is. This Vherecy- em de Prap. des, as appears by Eufebius, had much converfe with the P/?^- Evang.l.i.ca^. nicians ; where he purpofjly fpeaks concerning this Ophioneus: lo- Nov/ the Vhcenicians, as Eufebms likewife tells us, worOiiped their Go^ under the Form of a Serpent ; which probably might be occafioned by the Devils ambition and tyranny over men, Q q q that A 482. Origines Sacra : Book III^, that would be worfhipped among them in that very Form wherein he had donefo much mifchief to the world. It was very early in the world, when the Thcemcians and zAlgy^tians^ did begin to adore their Gods under the Form of Serpents for the beginning of it is attributed toTaautus by Eufehitts,^ y^lv H^ *xsT dvTov etv^f ^oiviKU n KAt 'A/'juVt/o/. Neither was this on- ly among the Pbcenicians and t^gyptians^ but where-ever the Pfx'// reigned, xhtSerfevt was had in fome peculiar venera- tion ; tllQUCQ J u/lin Mar tj r fklth, '^^ Tretvrt voi^^oi^iyay Taf ^ph^. 2. vulv ^uv 'o'pti Tvi^iioKov iii}A KAi.fjLv^eioy ApAy^d^iTAi' the Serpent IV as the Symbol of adoration among them ; and was the- proper Indicium^ or note of a eonfecrated place ^?i% is evident by, that of Verfius, ^0typ, J. Tinge duos angues\ pueriy facer eft locus.. Thence the Scholiafi on Arifiophanes on that place in Plutus^ U^n^dTlutJ Zv J)jo J'fci'Koy']' OK, r vie^,ohD^rves xjsivcof Tiuin rolf n§aai J^^a." Kftvlii 'TTA^iv^iUTo, io that wherc-evcr any God or Hero was to be worfhipped, there were Serpents painted todenotefo much. So Ortts Apollo faith ofthQzy£gjfptiansJ^I^A^oy 6 S^V iA^Lu^ ^AoiKKJuov p^ft/<7Ky ^mri^'i^Ai To7f -S-so/f, they Were wont to put the form of Heinf. j^ri' a golden Bafilisk to their Gods. Heinfitis COnceives that the firil. fiarch. /?.! 8. ed. worlliip of ^p^// which fignifies a Serpent, Ut ?jon duhitandum fit^ faith he, (]mn Vjthius Apollo^ hoc efi^ Spurcus ille Jpiritus^ (]uem Hehrai Ob d^ Abaddon^ Hellenifia ad 'verbum^, 'A'johKvcoMcn,, cateri 'AtkA^wka dixerunt^ fub hac forma fjua mi" feriam humano generi in-vexity primo cultusft in Gracia. And ■ which is further obfervable, the Devil was always ambitious to have the world think that \hz knowledge of good and eziil was to come by the Serpent ftill ; thence thefamous oracle o^Apcllo here at Delphi ; thence came theufe of Serpents lb much in Divinati- #w,thence U^n3 lignifies to divine^fromWr\} z Serpent ; and foa- mong thftGreeks owy (iokti, is taken in the fame fence, from •iiVVQi a Serpent. So that excellent Glojjograpker Hefychius ; otuvl^^ chap. } . The Divine Attthority of the Scriptures ajferte^, 48} The Serpent was reckoned among the pedefiria aujpkia by the Ro?nans .; and Homer tells in that Iblemn divinatton concern- ing the Greeks fuccefs at Troy there appears, , . . ^ , _ lUad.0, Which faith Heififius^ is an exaft defcription of the Nachas 5 whom they would have (b called from the marks on his back, which they accurately obferved \n dfvinat'ton. Thus we fee how careful the De^fil was to advance his honour in the world under that Form^ wherein he had deceived mankind * into lb much folly and milery. We meet with fome remainders of man's being caft out of 5. Paradife^wi^onhh fall 2imor\gt\i^ Heathens. On>ew thinks that Tlato by his converfe with the Jews in E.gypt,'6\<\ underftand f ^'"^If '/g ^^^ the Hifiory of the fall of man^ which he after his way anig- matically delcribes in his Sympfiacks, Where he brings in "Borus the God of flenty feafimg with the refl of the Gods ; after fuf per Penia comes a begging to the door ; Porus being drunk Tvith NeSlar^ goes into Jupiter's garden, and there falls ajleep ; Penla obfer-ving it, fteals to him, and by this deceit con- £eived by him. In this Fable of Flato^ Origen takes notice what a near refemblance the garden of Jupiter hath to Fa- r.adife, Penia to the Serpent which circumvented Adam^ and Porus to man who was deceived fey the Serpent. Which he conceives more probable becaufe of Vlato his cuftom, t^ /t/s- ftiJ^K ^^ATt, to wrap up thofe excellent things he knew under fome fables becaufe of the 'vulgar ; for which he after fpeaks of his cuftom in altering and dfguifing what he had from tlie Jews, left he fliould too much difpleafe the fabulous nity of Rufinm. AhfiuUt hunc tandem Ruflni poena tumult wn Abfolvitq-ue Deos, Rufinus death doth clear the Godsy and fet My mind at eafe». \ But '«., 486 drighes Sacra : Book III. Tu//y I. -^.de But becsufe fome carry it higher,as Cat a in TuUy^ who>rea- Nat.Deor. ^^^^ l-|^g ^^i^ (gs became a States-man) in reference to fuch perlbns who had been ufeftil or hurtful to Common-wealths^ we may flippofe there might be fomewhat more of reafon than Interefi in fuch argumentations ; and yet even in thole difcourfes we may ftill find that the main orig'mo'l of this quar- rel againft //rox'/^^w^e, was an over-high ^/ffwofthemfelves, that they thought they deferred better from the Gods^ than to receive fuch injuries, or undergo fuch calamities. There- fore Cotta cries out on Providence^ becaufe fuch perfons who were ufeful to the Roman Chich are in them ^ men (hou'ld. learn to ^v^/^cy }^ TET«t>^£i'oi/, that which jvas comely andorderly^and hate all diforderly and irregular motions ; For as he excellently fpeaks : » ><^'? '^^ ^j *" ^jluZj^v cHy^^a-yrO- d'TroKetvitp 02» Tn^vYAiV ]) TO fMavi(ni> ^ ^ta^a 7^ cy Ittiivo) KAKm )^ el)^^v iii di^inv KA^^i^r There is no greater benefit man can receive from God, than to attain true 'verttte by the imitation and furfuip of thofe f erf cf ions vMch are in him. And thence, faith Plutarch, God forbears to puniQi wicked men prefently, not" lefl: if be (hould punifli them he might do that he would re- pent of afterwards, a^V «V®f to mfi TaV TtiAaeJicci ^c^acPa )^ Acl0fov cL(pai§Svj hut that he might take away the fury and 'vio- lence of men in revenging their injuries on each other, that they (hould not do it in wrath and anger, with as much eager- nefs as they fatisfie their hunger and thirfty whereby they do, (ihmS'^v Toi^ hihU7n]>zo7iv, leap upon them 7vho have injured them, with as much fury as a wild beaft upon his prey -, buf men iliould learn to imitate ^hv kKiiya r^^mrct kaI i/.ihhmiv^ God's gentlenefs and patience, whereby he gives the offender* time to confider witb himfelf what he hath done, before he doth feverely punidi him. As Plato when his Boy had an- gred him, flood ftill awhile without ftriking him., tov ^iu^\^ Mhd^uy, as he faid, pwnjhing himfelf fir ft- for his anger, be- fore he would chaftife the Boy for his fault ; and Archytas-^ when he faw how negligent his workmen had been, and be- gan to be very angry with them, told them, ivw.;^lri on l^y^- (^oy.ct/ vuty, Jt is well for you that I am an^ry with you Now faith Plutarch, if the confideration of this forbearance in men Ihould tend to moderate mens heat and violence, how much more fhould the confideration of the lenity and patience o^God, do it'l ^ ^tou inyei'd-iLt uiexQv d^in-i r{w <7!f^iT7jTU }y Twy /us>aAo- cTOsS-^tftvj and to account gentlenefs and forbearance to be an imitation of devine perfettions. Now what can be more ra- tional dXidi agreeable to our.apprehenfions of .^divine nature than^ 488 Origines Sacra : Book IIL than this is, that helhould (hew his goodnefs to all, and by his forbearance of ^0 many, teach the world more meeknels and gentlenefs towards each other ? For if offences rife by the cjuality of the prfcn agalnft whom they are committed, no injuries can be fo great in one m^an to another, as thole affronts arc men put upn Gcd by their continual frcuocations of him ; And if God then be of fo infinite patience to for- bear fuch who have offended him, what juftice and reafon is there, but that men (hould exprefs more lenity and patience towards each other ? So Hterccles excellently fpeaks, h^i^^tai Tii ift^ctv^^aTnctg ct>pof^'v <^u^t rh toa/i' • the City vjanted fome fevere difctflme, l^\\QWQt T'otilas^ when he found what ftrange fuccefs he had in his enterprifcs, called himfelf Fiagdlum Dei , and thought God raifed him up on purpofe to be a fcourge for the/wj of the world. And no doubt thofe flrange paffages of the Roman Co'mmon'ivealtb (which made Caro^t leaft difpute providence^ and lay, res divinof ryiuhum habere caliginjs^ when he faw Pompey fuccej^ftdl as long as he ferved his ambition , but prefently overthrown when he . ftood for the Common-7uealth) thefe things, I fay, had a high- er end than they looked at, which was to make both Tompey and Cc^far the tnfiruments of Divine jufiice to punidi the Ro- mans for their lufis , ambition and cruelty , which w^re nevct greater than in that Age. Now then, if God muft juftly pu- niili Oifenders , why may he not fpare fome to make them his infiruments in the punijhing of others , efpecially fince af- ter he hath ufed his rods , he may caft them into the fire too ? as was evident in the infiance of Cafar^ who, after all his Jlatdghters and triumphs, w^as murthered in the Senate^ and that by fome who had been as aBive as any for him. And herein Divine Juftice , both as to the punifliment of the perfons , and the means of it , hath been very remarkable in multitudes of infiances^ which every ones reading may af- ford him. 4 Therefore, another account why G^Jmay fpare wicked men a great while, is, That divine providence might more re- markably be obferved in the manner of their funtjljment after- wards, Plutarch tells us of Callippus, who was fiabb'd by his enemies with the fame dagger with which he had killed Dion under a pretence of friendihip. And when Mitim the Argtve was killed in a tumult, afterwards, upon the day of a fblemn (hew , a braj^ Statue in the market place fell upon his murtherer^ and killed him there. But moft remarkable is the ftory of Beljtfi recorded by the fame Author, who having kil- led his Father i and a long time concealed it, goes one night to chap. 3 . The Divine Authority of the Scriptures afferted. 49 x to fupper to fome Friends^ and while he was there, thrufts up his fpear into a Swallow's neft, and pulls it down, and kills the young ones j his Friends asking him the reafon of (b ftrangc an a(!^ion : oj y6 (f^n) f/» m?^Ai K^TUfjutfJvf^inv aZtctt 4-si/«/^f k^ ^^. Ta^QcSinv, a>i d7nKnvoy]Q- r Trnjief^. ^^ ^^^ J^^^ ^^^^ ) ^^ith he, how they faljly accufe we ^ and cry out , that I have killed my Father ? Which being by the perfons prefent carried to the King^ and the truth of it found out, he was executed for it. Such (Irange ways doth providence fometimes ufe to fliew^ how vigilant it is, even when we think it ileeps the moft. 5. Though Gcd Jj^ares the perjons of wicked men, he doth vot deferr their fumjl)ment^ when the thoughts of their evil acti- ons is the greateft torment to them -, Maxima feccati foena , efi, peccaJJ'e, as Seneca fpeaks. Sin bears its own punifhment along with it. Wickednefs is J'im 77?/S/» J\^[M\s^-^i oiKlfa, the moft exofuijite contriver of wifery , which fills the minds of thole who commit it with continual conilernations, anxieties and perplexities of mind. But as that often and defervedly cited Author on this fubjedl, Plutarch tells us, moft men are in this like Children , who when they behold malefadlors in the Theatres in their cloth of geld , and purple robes , with their crowns on their heads dancing about, they admire them, and imagine them to be moft happy men , till they fee them lathed and beaten^ ^nd fire come out from their brave apparel ; fb faith he, as long as men fee others in their pomp and gran- deur, they think them far from punifhment, till they behold their execution, which, faith he, is not fo much the entrance of their fHnijlimenT, as the perfecficn of it. So that the Io?7ger the time of their lives is, the longer is the?;>^f of their puniJJj- ment here ; »/e yv.p^,v cLiTjA, I am the caufe of all this. God deals by wicked men , as Caligula v/as wont to fay of thole he com- manded to be executed , frit ut fntiant fe mori , he fo pu- niOies them , as to make them fenfible of their punifhments. And as Tacitus fpeaks of cruel and wielded perfons, cjuorum mmtes fi recludantur^ foffint af^ici laniatus d^ iHus ; cjuando ut corpora verherihm^ it a f^^vitia^ libidine, malis confultis ani' mm dilaceretur. Wicked nefs is the only frry which continu- ally haunts and lafljes thofe who delight in it , and leaves ftill behind it «t/^^! ;^ ?c^2£^' WB'^f, loathfome and terrible perturba- tions , fecret gripings of Confcience and felf-condemning thoughts for their folly and wickednefs ; like Lyfimachm^ who for extreme thirfl offered his Kingdom to the Geta to quench it, which whec he had done, (^i^ ^ l^v nay^iai, S? ' riJhvhJ^ «- Tw i?£^-%s/ctf, i^^nfActt 0ct(n\iia,i TUMKetvTHi- li^hat a wretch was I ( faith he ) to loje fuch a Kingdom for fofiort a pleafure J And though wicked men be not fenfible of the lofs of a far more glorious Kingdom than this of Lyfimachtts^ viz. that of Hea- 'ven^ yet they cannot but be fenfible how much they have loft that Kingdom which every good man hath in the tranc^uillity, of his ^ir it, and the command of his pajjions. 6, The time that God ^ares wicked men, is not fo long as we think for. It is all one, as Plutarch faith, as if we fliould complain , th'at the malefactor was puniflied in the evening , and not in the mornings God's forbearance is but for a very little time , compared with his own duration. We meafure God by the fhort hour-glaf of our own time , -when we are fb ready to confine him to our meafures. The time feems long to us, but it is as nothing in it felf : Iwi) 7c7r 7? 5to7< ymv dp- ^fa^vH Bin SteLSVt^a, 70 f^ttJiv ^' the whale life of man compa- red with eternity u nothing. Befides, all this time God fufFers wicked Chap. 3. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted. 49 3 wicked men to live here, he iiath them under fafe cuftcdy ; he doth but let them take the air within tht prtfon-walls, or it may be they may play andfport themfelves there, but there is no fcjfibility of efcaping out of the hands of Divine jufiice. 7. God forbears Ti^icked men here, becaufe the time ts to come wherein Gcd intends to funijh them. This is the higheft vindi- cation of Divine Providence as to the prefent impunity of wicked men in the world , becaufe this is not the proper iea- Ibn for the open execution of Juftice, There are but few in comparifon whom Juftice caufeth to be executed in the nrifon^ , of what are refer ved for t\i^ general Ajjiz.es ; God referves them /or a fair and open trial, for the greater vindication of his ho- nour, and manifeftation of his Juftice to the world. And al- though God's judgments even in this world beforaetimes fb re- markable , that we cannot but fee a hand of Providence in them , yet th^are but few whom God doth fo remarkably punifh here, to make us more firmly believe a day of Judg- ment to come. Which though it be moft clearly and fully re- vealed in Scripture , yet the Heathens themfelves from mere reafon have had fuch a perfuft/ion of it , that they have given this as another great reafon , why God did forbear to punifh wicked men here, becaufe he did referve them for future pu- niOiment. For, ns the fame Moraltfi fpeaks in the fame dif^ ' courfe concerning the Soul , dy^ACilctt ^ ^Wsf a^Aulk yT^ ^ ^^'-^^-P- s^i- 0ioi/, oTAv 0 S'tctydvi^dcfA tqtz Tjy^vi ^ yj) ^ rh And if the foul doth fubfifi after death, it fiands to the great- efi reafon, that it jhould there receive either reward or puntjh- went. Thus we fee how far natural hght, and moral reafon will carry men in the vindicating oi Divine Providence, as to the prefent impunity of wicked men. The other part which concerns the fufferings of good men is Se^ 22. notof fo great difficulty, becaufe there are none fo good as not to 494 Orighes Sacra : Book HI. to have z mixture of e^il in them, and as they have a mixture of e'vil, fo they have but a mixture of pumfljmem ; none lying under lb great miferies here, but withall they have fomtjhare m the comforts of thts life. And therefore it is lefs wonder, that this part of Divine Trouidence which concerns the fujf^ermgs of good men , hath not wanted Ibme among the Heathen Mo- ^ ralifis who have made it their defign to vindicate it ; which fetting afide what SimfUctzts on EpiSfet^s , and many others have done , is fully performed by Seneca in his tracft on this very fubjeft, cur bonzs male fit y cum ft Vronjidentia (as Mu- rettts reftores the title of that book ) wherein thele following accounts are given of it. I. God brings them up as his children under jJjarp difcipline -Senec. de Pro- for their future benefit, A good man in Senecas language is, vid. c. I. difcipulus Dei^ amulatorque.^ d^ 'vera progenies : which in the language of the Scripture^ is, one taught of God, a follower of God, and one born of him. Now, (aithhe, Parens illemagnificm, 'uirtutum non lenis exathr , ficut feveri patres , durim educat, Gody 7vho is the great Father of good men , keeps them under difcipline while under age , and by hardjhip fits them for the practice of 'uertue. Thence he bids us take notice of the diffe- rent indulgence of Fathers and Mothers to their Children; the Father he haftens them to School , fuffers them not to be idle on their play-days, makes them toil, and fometimes cry; the Mother (he is all for holding them in her lap , keeping them out of the Sun , and from catching cold, would not willingly have them either cry or take pains. Fatrium habet Deus ad- ^erfus bonos animum^ d^ illos fortius amat. God bears the in-- dulgence of a Father towards his children^ and loves them with greater feventj, 1. Good men receive benefit by their fufferings ; (^uicffuid evenit in fuum colorem trahit , faith Seneca of a good man , which in the language of the Afofik is, every thing works to» gether for his good. The Sea lofeth nothing , faith he , of its faltnef by the rivers running into it y neither doth a good man by the current of his fufferings. And of all benefits which he re- I ceives, that of the exercife and trtal of his vertue and patience 1 is mod difccrnable. Mar cet fine adverfario virtus ; as foon as Carthage w^as deftroyed, Rome fell to Luxury : True wreftlers defire to have fome to try their ftrength upon them ; cut non in- dufirio Chap. 3. The Divhe Authority of the Scriptures afferted, 495: du^rto ot'ium fxna efi ? an aftive fpirit hates idlenefs and co- ward ife ; for etiamfi cecideritj de genu pignat^ thcttghhis legs be cut off^ he will fight on his knees. ^, It redounds to God^s honour ^ 'when gcod men hear tip under fujferings. Ecce far Deo d'tgnum vir fonts cum mala fort una comfofitus. It is a fpecftacle God delights to fee , a good man combote with calamities. God doth in Seneca's phrale (xuof- dam fafiidto tran'fire^ paOTeth them by in a flight ; an old wreft- lev [corns to contend with a coward^ one who is 'vinci faratus^ ready to yield up prefently. Calamitates fub jugum mitt ere froprium magni vin efiy it argues a noble fpirit to be able to fubdue miferies. • 4. It tends to the trial and increafe of their fir ength, Seneca highly extols that fpeech of the Phtlojopher Demetrius , Nthtl infelicius eo cui nihil un^^uam evenit adverfi\ nonlicuit eninilli fe experiri. He is the moft unhappy man who never knew what mifery meant ; for 'he could never know what he was- able to bear. And , as he faith ; to pals ones life away fine morfu animi, without any trouble, it is ignorare rerum natu- re alteram partem^ not to know what is upon the re^uerfe of nature. Idem licet feccrint cjui integri revertuntur ex acie, ma- gis Jpeclatur qui faucius redit. Though he that comes home found, might fight as w^U as he that is wounded; yet the wounded perfbn hath the more pity, and is moft cryed up for^ his valour. Tlie Tilot is feen in a tempefi-, a Soldier m bat- tel, and z good man in fuffenngs. God doth by fuch as Ma- fiers doe by Scholars , qui plus labor is ab his exigunt , quibus certior Jpes efi : who fet the befi wltS the hardefi tasks, 5. God exercifeth good men with fujferings , to difco'ver the in-- differ encj of thofe things which men 'value Jo much in the world, . ^hen he denies them to good men. Blindnels would be hatefull, - if none were blind but fuch whofe eyes were put out ; and therefore Appius and Metellus were blind. Riches are no- good things, therefore the w$rft as well as the befi have them.- JSlullo modo mag is pot efi Deus concupita traduce re , quam ft il- ia ad turpiffimos defert, ab optimis abigit. God COUld not tra- duce or defame thofe things more which men d-efire fo much, than by taking themi away from the beft of men , and giving... them to the worft. ^v 6, That 49 i Origms Sacra : Book III. 6, That they might be examples to others of patience and con- fiancy ; For, as Seneca concludes, nati (unt in exemplary they are born to be patterns to others. If to thefe things we add what the M'ord of God difcovers concerning the nature^ grounds^ and ends of affliSftons, and that glcrjf which (hall be revealed^ in comparifon with n>hich exceeding tv eight of ghry^ thefe light and moment any affiiBions are not at all to he 'valued^ then we have a clear and full vindication' q{ Divine Provi- dence, as to the fuffenngs of good men, as well as to the /w- f unity of fuch as are vHcked. But however, from hence we fee how far the mere light of reajon hath carried men in re- folving thefe difficulties concerning God's Providence in the world, and what a rational account may be given of them, fup- pofing evil of punijhment to arife ^vom fin, and that there is a God in the world, who is ready to punifli the wicked, and to reward xht good : Which was the thing to be Ihewed. CHAR v>iia]^«^« ffj^ r>tylnM Ani-Vinyfiy nffhp Rrripturea afferted, 497 CHAR IV. Of the Origin of Nations, 'All mankind, derived from Adam, // tin Scriptures he true. The contrary fuppofition an introduction to Atheifm. The truth of the Hiftory of the Flood. The poffibility of an univerfal deluge proved. The Flood univerfal as to mankind^ whether univerfal ^ to the Earth and Animals \ no neceffity of averting either, Tet fuppofmg the poffibility of it demonfirated without creation of new waters. Of the Fountains of the, deep. The proportion which the height of Mountains bears to the Diameter of the Earth. No Mountains much above three mile perpendicular. Of the Origin of Fountains, The opinion of Ariftotle and others concerning it difcufed. The true account of them from the va- ' pours arifingfrom the mafs of fubterraneous waters. Of the Ca- pacity of the Ark for receiving the Animals^ from Buteo and others. The truth of the deluge from t^e Tejiimony of Heathen. Nations, Of the propagation of Nations from Noah's poflerity. Of the beginning of the Af[y rim Empire. The multiplication of mankind after the Flood. Of the Chronology of the LXX. Of the time between the Flood and Abraham, and the advantages of it. Of the pretence of fuch Nations^ who called themfelves Aborigines, Adifcourfe concerning thefirft Plantation ^'/Greece, the common opinion propounded and rejected. The Hellens not thefirft Inhabitants t>f Greece, but the Pelalgi. The large fpread of them over the parts of Greece ; Of their language different from the Greeks, whence thefe Pelafgi came ; that Phaleg w/u the Pelafgus of Greece, and the leader of that Colony^ proved from Epiphanius : the language of the Pelafgi in Greece Ori- ental : thence an account given of the many Hebrew words in the Greek language^ and the remainders of the Eaftern langua- ges in the IJlands ^/Greece, both which not from the Phoeni- cians ^ Bochartus thinks^ but from the old Pelafgi. Of the ground of the affinity between the Jews and Lacedaemonians. Of the peopling of America, TH E next thing we proceed to give a rational account of,. Sect, i. in the Hiftory of the firft ages of the World contained m Scripture^ is the peopling of the World from Adam, Which Sff is / is of great confequence for us to underftand not only for the fatisfadlion of our curiofity as to the true Origin of Nations but alfo in order to our believing the truih of the Scriptures^ and the univerfal etfeds of the fall of man. Neither of which can be fufficiently cleared without this. For as it is hard to conceive h'^w the effeds of mans fall lliould extend to all man- kind, unlels all mankind were propagated from Adam ; fo it is unconceivable how the account of things given in Scripture fhould be true, if there were perfons exiftent in the World long before Adam was. Since the Scripture doth- ib plainly ACl. 17. 26. affirm, that God hath made of one blood all Nations of men ^ for to dwell on the face of the earth \ Some Greek copies read it ^f 5V0?, leaving out Aif^fj©- which the vulgar Latin follows : the Arahick verjjon to explain both, reads it ex homine, or as De Dien renders it exAdamouno^th^VQ being but the difference of one letter in the Eajiern languages betw^een CDl and CD"18, the one denoting blood and the ether man. But if we take it as our mxore ordinary copies read it ^ '^vo^ eti[/.aLl3-y yet there- by it is plain, that the meaning is not that all mankind was made of the fame uniform matter^ as the Authour of the Vr^- Adamites weakly imas;ined, (for by that reafon, not only man- kind but the whole World might be faid to be ^ ^-vii aiiaaIQ- of tne fame blood, fince all things in the World were at firfl formed out of the lame matter,) but ctW is taken there in the fence in which it occurrs in the beft Greek Authours, for the ftock out of w'hich men come : So Horner^ Thence thofe who are near relations, are called in Sophocles^ 0/ rs^i cu'ia.a\Q- '-, Thence the name of Confanguinity for nearncfs of relation j and Firgil ufeth fanguis in the fame fence, Trojano a fangnine duel. So that the Ap 'files meaning is, that however men now are fo difperfed in their habitations , and differ fo much in lan- / guage and cuftoms from each other, yet they all were origi- 1 nally of the fdm^fiockj and did derive their fucceffion froni I that firft man whom God created. Neither can it be conceived on Chap.4- 72?^ Divine Authority of the Scriptures aJferteJ, 49 9 on what account Adam in xht Scripture is called th^firfi man, i Cor. 15. ^j, and that he was made a living fml^ and of the earth, earthly j 47. unlcfs it were to denote that he was ablblutely the firfi of his kind, and fo was to be the ftandard and meafure of all that follows. And when our Saviour would reduce all things to the beginning, he inftanceth in thofe words which were pro- nounced after Fve was formed, But from the beginning of the Mark fo. 6,7, Creation God made them male and female \ For this caufe Jhall a man leave Father and Mother and cleave unto his wife. Now nothing can be more plain and eaOe than from hence to ar- gue thus ; thofe of whom thofe words were fpoken, were the firfl male and female which were made in the beginning of the .Creation \ but it is evident thefe words were fpoken of Adam and Eve : And Adam faid, this is novo hone of my bone, andG^ti. 2.23,24. flefh of my flejh : therefore JJ.all a man leave his Father and his Mother and fh all cleave unto his Wife. If the "scriptures then - of the Ntw Tejfament be true, it is moft plain and evident that all mankind is delcended from Adam \ and no lefs confpi- cuous is it from the hiflory of the Creation as delivered by Mofes. For how neceflary had it been for Mofes, when he was gi- Sec^. 2. ving an account of the Origin ofthi?igs to have difcovered by whom the World was firft planted , if there had been any fuch plantation before Adf.m ; but to fay that all the defign of Mofes was only to give an account of the Origin and Hi- ftory of the Jewifh Nation, and that Adam was only the firft ^ that flock, is manifeftly ridiculous, it being fo clear, that not only from Adnm and Noah, but from Sem, Abraham^ and Ifaac^ came other Nations befides that of Jews, And by the fame reafon that it is faid, that Mofes only fpeaks of the Ori- gin of the Jemjh Nation in the hiftory of Adam, it may as well be faid that Mofes fpeaks only of the making of Canaan, and that part of the Heavens which was over it, when he de- fcribes the Creation of the World in the fix days work. For why may not the Earth in the fecond verfe of Genefis be as well un- derftood of the Land of Jud^a, and the light and produdion of Animals and Vegetables referr only to that, as to underftand it fb in reference to the Flood, and in many other paffages re- lating to thofe eldeft times ? But the Amhour of that Hypo- thefts anfwers, That the firfi Chapter of Genefis may relate to S f f 2 the JGO Origines Sacrce : "^ Book III. the true Origin of the worlds and the firft peopling of it , hut in the fecond Mofes begins to give an account of the fir Ji man and woman of the Jewijh Nation. Very probable ! but if this be- not a putting afunder thofe which God hath joyned together, nothing is. For doth not Mofes plainly at tirft give an ac- count of the formation of things, in the firft fix days, and of .y his reji on the feventh ? but how could he be faid to have refted then from the works of Creation^ if after this followed' the formation of Jdam and Eve in the fecond Chapter ? Be- (ides if the forming of man, mentioned, Gen, 2.7. bediftindl from that mentioned, Gen. 1.27. then by all parity ofreafon^ V""^'*^^ D'Qtyn nnh'in the Generations of Heaven -and Earth mentioned, ■ Gf;?. 2.4. muft be diftind from the Creation of the Heaven and Earth, mentioned. Gen. 1. 1. And {b if there were another Creation of Heaven and Earth belonging to the Jews in Gen. 2. we may hkewife believe that there was a new Creation of man and woman in that Chapter diftini^t from that mentioned in the former. Again further, if there had been any fuch perfons in the world before Adam, no doubt Adam himfelf was ignorant of them ; or elfe it had been a falfe and ridiculous account which he gives of the name of his Wife Gen. 3. ac, niH, hecaufe fl:e wa^ ^vh^ D8 the Mother of all living. Not of all living things, for that had been a more proper dcfcription 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 Chaldee Paraphraft underftands it, (he was called Hava, becaufe (lie was HW}^ Ua ^31 SQK the Mother of all the Sons of men. And fo the Arabick verfion, quia ipfafuit mater omnis viventis rationalis. To which purpofe our Learn- Selden de jure ^'^ Selden cites the verfion of the Mauritanian Jews^ and the natur.&gent. TerfickofTawaJius. 1. 1. e. s.p. 6$. But what-ever the credit or authority of thefc Verfions be, this is moft certain, that Adam had no reafon at all to have given this name to his wife, as being the Mother of all livings, if there had been any of mankind exifting 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 hypothefis of Fr^e-Adamites is undoubtedly falle. And certainly who-ever ferioufly coniiders the. \ chap. 4 . The Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted: 505 the frequent reflexions on the Authority of the Scriptures which were cad by the Aiithour of that Fitlion^ and his endea- vouring on all occafions to derogate ivom the miracles recorded in it, may eafily fufpedl the defign of that Authour was not to gain any credit to his opinion from thofe arguments from Scripture^ which he makes fliew of ( which are pitifully weak and ridiculous,) but having by the help of fuch arguments made his opinion more plauiible, his hope was that his opi- nion would in time undermine the Scriptures themfelves. . When he had made it appear that the account given in the Scriptures of the plantation of the World was unfatisfadory^ fince there were men before AdarUy which the Scriptures to pleafe the Jewijh Nation^ take no notice of. So that after he had attempted to proftitute the Scriptures to his opinion, his next work had been to have turned them out of doors, as not of credit to be rehed on by any when they were fo common to every opinion. But how impious, abfurd and rude that attempt was upon the [acred and inviolable authority of the Scriptures^ hath been fo fully dilcovered by his very m.any not unlearned adverfaries, that it might feem needlefs fo much as to have taken notice of fo weakly grounded,and infirmly proved an opinion, had it not thus far lain in my way in order to the- cl earing the true Origin of Nations according to the Scriptures. The main foundations of which fabulous opinion lying chiefly in the pretended antiquities of the Chaldeans, ^gyptians^ and others, have been fully taken away -in our firft book^ where our whole de[ign was to manifeft the want of credibility in thole accounts of ancient times, which are delivered by Heathen Na- tions in oppofition to the Scriptures. There is nothing at all in Scripture from the Creation of Adam to the Flood which leems to give any countenance to that figment, but only what may be eafily relolved from the confederation of the great con- cifenefs of the Mofaick Hiflory, in reporting that long interval of time which was between the fall of Adam, and the Flood} By means of which concifenefs fuch things are reported as fpeedily done, becaufe immediately, fucceeding in the ftory, which asked a very confiderable time before they could be ef- fected ; and belides all things which Were done before the Flood, being all quite obliterated by it, and all the numerous po^erity of Adam being then deftroyed . ( only Noah and his Family j'oz Origines Sacr^ : Book HI, Family excepted,) to what purpofe had it been any further to have reported the parages before the Flood, otherwife than thereby to let us underftand the certainty of the fuccejfton of perfons from Adam, and fuch actions in thofe times which might be remarkable difcoveries of God's providence and Man's wickednefs in it, which being moft apparent at firfl in Cain and his pofterity, did by degrees fo fpread its felf over the face of the then inhabited World, that the jufi: God was thereby pro- voked to fend a Deluge among them to fweep away the pre- fent inhabitants to make room for another Generation to fuc- ceed them. SeB, 3. This therefore we now come to confider^ viz. The Hiftory of the Flood, and the certainty of the propagation of the JVorld from the pofterity of Noah after th€ I^lood, I begin with the Hiftery of the Flood its felf, as to which , two things will be fufficient to demonftrate the truth of it. i. If there be no^ thing in it repugnant to reafon. 2, If we have fnfficient evidence of the truth of it, from fuch who have not yet believed the Scrip- tures, There are only two things which feem queftionable to reafon concerning the Flood 5 the firft, is, concerning the poffi- bility of the Flood its felf ', the other is, concerning the capacity of the Ark for preferving all kinds of Animals. The only ground of queflioning thQ pojfibi I ity of fuch a Flood, as that is related in Scripture, hath been from hence, that fome have fuppoled it impoflible that all the water which is contained in the air, fuppofing it to fall down, (liould raife th^furface of water upon the earth a foot and a half in height -, fo that either new waters rnuft be created to overflow the earth, or elfe there muft be fuppofed a rarefaBion of the Water contained in the Sea and all Rivers, fb that it muft take up at leaft fifteen times the fpace that now it doth •, but then they fay, if the Water had been thus rarified, it could neither have deftroyed man nor beaft^ neither could Noah's Ark have been born up by it any ^ more than by liquid Air, To this therefore, I anfwer, Firfl;, I cannot lee any urgent neceflity from the Scripture toaflert, that tht Flood did fpread its felf over all the furface of the earth. That all mankind (thole in the Ark excepted) were deftroyed by it, is moft certain according to the Scrip- tures, When the occafion of the Flood is thus exprefled, i Gen. 6. j, 7. yind God faw that the wickednefs of man was great upon the earth, I Chap.4. 'the Divine Authority of the Scriptures aJferteJ. 503 e^rth a>jd that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart M%ufdJ^^' ^^.^ ^ , ^;^^ i^ordfaid, I will defiroy man whom I have createa, from the jau ^r -hp^ earth. It could not be then any particular deluge of fo fmall a i^ouuuy as vnl^- Jline^ which is here expreffed, as feme have ridiculouOy ima- gined ; for we find an univerfal corruption in the earth mefi- tioned as the caufe ; an univ-rfal threatning upon all me^for this caufe; and afterwards an univerfal defiruB-ion expreOed, as the effe^s of this Flood, And all fiefh died that moved upon Gen. 7. 21,23 the earthy and every man. And every living fubfiance wa/> de- firoyed which was upon the face of the ground both man and cat- tel^ and the creeping things , ayid the fowl of the Heaven , and they were defiroy ed from the Earthy and Noah only remained a- live^ and they that were with him in the Ark, So then it is evident that the Flood was univerfal as to mankind, but from thence follows no neceflity at all of afferting the univerfality of it as to the Globe of the Earth, unlefs it be fufficiently pro- ved that the whole Earth was peopled before th^ Flood: which I defpair of ever feeing proved. And what reafon can there be to extend the Flood beyond the occafion of it, which was the corruption of mankind f And it feems very ftrange that in fo (hort an Interval^ in comparifon as that was from Adam to the Floods according to the ordinary computation, viz, 16^6 years, and not much above two thoufand , according to the largeft, the world (hould then be fully peopled , when in fo much \ongtv d. fp ace of time (ince the Flood to this day, the Earth is capable of receiving far more Inhabitants^ than now it hath. The only probability then left for afferting the uni- verfality of the Floods as to the Globe of the Earthy is from the deftrudtion of all living creatures together with man ; now though men might not have fpread themfelves over the whole furface of the Earth , yet beafis and creeping things might , which were all deftroyed with the Flood : For it is faid, That allflefh died that moved upon the Earthy both of fowl and of cat^ telj and of beafis and of every creeping things that creepeth upon the Earthy and every man. To what end fliould there be not only a note of univerfality added, but fuch a particular enu- meration of the feveral kinds of bealis^ creeping things, and fowlsy if they were not all deftroyed ? To this I anfvver. I ' grant as far as the Flood extended^ all thefe were deftroyed \ but ^^* Or igines Sacra;: feook IIL but I fee no reafon to extend the deftruBion of thefe beyond that compafs and fpace olEarth where mtnjxih'H-- ' ^J J^ the punifliment umn*^'^-r^^ y^a:. uh^medty, and could nnf Kut t« ^.urn.umnant with the deftrutfion of mankind, but (the occafion of the deluge being the fm of W/2;?, who was pu- niflied in the beafis that were deftroyed for his fake, as well as in himfelf ) where the occafton was not, as where there were animals^ and no men, there feems no neceffity of extending the Flood thither. But to what end then it will be replied, Did God command Noah, with fo much care to take of all kinds of be aft s and birds, and creeping things into the Ark with him^ if all thefe living creatures were not deftroyed by the Flood ? I anfwer, becaufe all thofc things were deftroyed where-ever the ' Flood was 5 liippofe then the whole Continent oi Jfia was peo- pled before the Flood, which is as much as we may in reafon fuppofe, I fay, all the living creatures in that Continent were all deftroyed ; or if we may fuppofe it to have extended over our whole Continent of the anciently known World j what rea- fon would there be that in the oppoiite part of the Globe, viz. America, which we fuppofe to be unpeopled then, all the li- ving creatures fhould there be deftroyed, becaufe men had fin- ned in this ? And would there not on this fuppofition have been a fufficient reafon to prefer ve living creatures in the Ark for future propagation, when all other living creatures extant had been in fuch remote places as would not have been accef- fible by them in many generations, and thofe beafts growing wild for want of Inhabitants, would not have proved prefently ferviceable for the ufe of men after the Flood i" Which was certainly the main thing looked at in the prefervation of them in the Ark, that men mJght have all of them ready for their ufe prefently after the Flood, which could not have been, had not the feveral kinds been preferved in the Ark, although we fuppofe them not deftroyed in all partsof the World. Seel, 4. All this proceeds on fuppofition that animals were propaga- ted much further in the World than men were, before th€ Flood. Which I confefs feems very probable to me, on this account, becaufe the produdtion of animals is parallel in Gene^ fis with that of Fifioes, and both of them different from Man ; Gen. I. 20 21. for God faith. Let the Waters bring forth every moving creature that hath life j viz. Fijhy and Fowl j and accordingly it is faid, ' . that Chap4* 3^7;^ Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted. joj that the Waters brought forth ahmdaistly every living creature after their kindy and every fowl after his kind. Accordingly in the produdion of heajis^ we read, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after hi6 kindy cattle^ and creeping things and Ver . 24, heafh of the earth after his kind, and it wmfo : But in the pro- duction of Man, it is faid, Let m make Man in our own likenefs, Ver. 16, From hence I obferve this difference between the produEiion of animalSyZnd of manythat in the one God gave ^prolifick power to the £arth and Waters for production of the feveral living creatures which came from them ; fo that t\\Q feminal princi- ples of them were contained in the matter out of which they were produced, which was otherwile in man^ who was made by a peculiar hand of the great Creator himfelf, who thence is faid to have formed man of the duft of the ground. Now Gen. 2. 6. therefore although there were but one Male and Female of mankind at /r/, which had a fpecial formation by God him- felf ; yet there is no reafon we fhould conceive it to be ^0 as to the produBion of other living creatures^ whether Fifh^ or Fowly or Beafts \ but the prolifick vertue being by Gods power given to that material principle out of which they were formed, it may very well be fuppofed that many of the fame kind were at firft produced. For it feems very ftrange to imagine that in the whole Ocean there (hould be only two of a kind produ- ced ; but Fifh and Fowl both arifing from the water,^ we may have juft realbn to think, that the waters being feparated be- fore this prolifick vertue was communicated to the whole mafs of Waters, might in the feveral /?jr^/ of the Globe of the Earthy bring forth both Fifh and Fowl after their kinds. The fame I fay of the produdlion of Animals in the fixth day's work, which arc ranked into three forts, Cattle^ Creeping-things ^ and Beafis of the Earth after their kinds ; Now God faying, Let the Earth bring forth her living creatures^ { and that after the waters had divided fome parts of the Earth from other, ib that there could be no palfage for the Cattle^ Creeping-things ^ and Beafts out of one part into another, without the help of Man,) it feems very probable that at leaft thofe parts of the Earth which were thus divided from each other, did bring forth thefe feveral living creatures after their kinds, which did after propagate in tkofe parts without being brought thither by tl\Q help of man. If now this fuppofition be embraced, by it T 1 1 we $06 Origines Sacrce : Book III. we prefently clear ourfelves of many difficulties concerning the propagation of jinimals in the World, and their converfation in the Ark^ which many have been fo much to feek for iatis- fa(ftion in. As how the unknown kind of Serpents in Brafil^ the flow-bellied creature of the Indies^ and all thofe ftrangc fpecies of animals feen in the JVeft-lndies fliould either come into the Ark of Noah^ or be conveyed out of it into tliofe Countries which are divided from that Continent where the Flood was by fo vaft an Ocean on the one fide, and at leaft fo large a tra£t of Land on the other ( fuppofing any paflfage out of one Continent into another, which yet hath not been dil^ covered.) Befides, fome kind of Animals cannot live out of that particular Clime wherein they are ; and there are many forts of animals difcovered in America^ and the adjoyning Iflands, which have left no remainders of themfelves in thefe parts of the World. And it feems very ftrange that thele iliould propagate into thofe remote parts of tliQ world from the place cf the Floods and leave none at all of their number behind them in thofe parts from whence they were propaga- ted. Thefe things at leaft make that opinion very probable which extends the produBion of Animals beyond that of man- kind in the old World, and that the I^lood though it deftroyed all mankind^ and every living creature within that compafs wherein mankind inhabited, yet might not extend it felf to thoie parts, and th^ Animals therein, in which men had never inhabited. And by this means we need not make ^o many miracles as fome are fain to do about the Flood ; and all thofe difficulties concerning xhz propagation of animals do of them- felves vanifli and fall to the ground. This is the firft way of refolving the difficulty concerning t\\Q pojjibility of the Floods by afferting it not to have been over the whole Globe of the Earthy but only over thofe parts where mankind inhabited. Ucl, 5. Secondly^ Suppofe the Flood to have been over the whole Globe of the Earthy yet there might have been water enough to have over whelmed it to the height mentioned in Scripture. For which we are to confider that many caufes concurred to the making of this Deluge-^ iirft, the Air was condenfed into Clouds, and thofe fell down with continued force and violence, not M:fi. of the breaking into drops, but all in a body ( which Sir fValter World, I.E. c], Rawkigh parallels with Xht fpouts of the Wejf-l?idies ) which ft.^. 6. are S( Chap.4- T'/t^ Divwe Authority of the Scriptures ajferted. 507 are thence called the Cataracts or Flood-gates of Heaven, God loofening ( as he expreffeth it) the power retentive which was in the Cloudi^ and fo the waters muft needs fall in abundance, according to the expreffion of Job y Behold he with-holdeth the Joh 12. ij. waters, and they dry upj alfo he fendeth them out, and they over-^ turn the earth. Now, I fay, although thefe waters falling down with fo much fury and violence, as well as in fo great abun- dance, might quickly deftroy all Uvi?ig creatures \ yet this was not all 5 for God who held in the Ocean within its bounds, whereby he faith to it, Thm far it fhall go, and no further ^ might then give it commiffion to execute his juftice upon the finfull World : and to all this, we have another caufe of the Deluge y which was, That the Fountains of the great Deep were G^n. 7. ir. broken up. By which VatahluSy moft probably underftands, Im- menfam illam & profundam aquarum cop i am qu^e efi fuhter ter- ram : That vaft body of Waters which lies in the bowels of the Earth j Now when all thefe Fountains were broken up, and the Waters within the Earth rufli out with violence and im- petuofity upon it, it muft needs caufe an inundation fo great as that is mentioned in the Scripture. For as that judicious Hiftorian Sir W, Rawleigh .obferves, Let us confider that the ihid. Earth had above 21000 Miles corapafs, tht Diameter of the £^n/; according to that Circle 7000 Miles, and then from the Superficies to the Center 5500 Miles-, take then the higheft Mountain of the World, Caucdfrn, Taurm, 'feneriff, or any o- ther , and I do not find, faith he, that the higheft exceeds thirty Miles in height : It is not then impoflible, anfU^ering reafon with reafon, that all thofe Waters mixed within the Earth, 3500 Miles deep, (hould be able to cover the fpace of 30 Miles in heigh t^ which ;o Miles upright being found in the depths of the Earth 1 1 6 times ♦, for the Fomitains of the great Deep were broken, and the Waters drawn out of the bowels of the Earth. But then withall, faith he, if we confider the proportion which the Earth bears to the Air about it, we may eafily underftand the pojfibility of the Flood^ without any new creation oi waters \ for fuppofing fb much Air to be conden- fed, and fb turned into Water which doth encompafs the Earth, it will not feem ftrange to men of judgment, yea but of ordinary underftand ing, that the Earth ( God Co pleafing ) was covered over with Waters, without any new Creation. T 1 1 2 But SoS Origlnes Sacr^t : ' Book III. But this will yet appear more probable if the height of the higheft Mountains doth bear no greater a proportion to the Diameter of the Earthy than of the iS-jo pan to the whole fuppofing the Diameter of the Earth to be 8^55 Miles, as ^rr})}^' I ^' ^^If^^^^ computes both. And it is more than probable, T-J^ -S- •!• that YHQn have been exceedingly miftaken, as to the height of Mountains^ which comes ^0 far (hort of what Sir JValtcr Raw- leigh allows to them, that the higheft Mountain in the World will not be found to be five dired Miles in height taking the altitude of them from the plain they ftand upon. Olympm whofe height is fo extolled by the Voets and ancient Greeks^ that it is faid to exceed tht Clouds ; yet Plutarch tells us that PluL in MmU Xevagoroi meafured it and found it not to exceed a Mile and a lion. Plin. 1. 1. half perpendicular and about 70 Paces. Much about the fam^e ^' ^^' height Pliny faith that Dic^archm found the Mountain Pelion to be. The Mount Athos is fuppofed of extraordinary height y becaufe it cafts its fliadow into the Ifle of Lemnos^ which ac- • cording to Pliny was 8 7 Miles, yet Gajfendm allows it but two yof in PojKp. Miles in height ; but Ifaac VoJJiws in a learned difcourfe con- Melam.is.c.i. ceming the height of Mountains in his notes on Pomponim Me- 1^. 1 1 5? <:^c, 1^^ ^^^ ^^^ 2\\o\w above i o or 1 1 Furlongs at moft to the height of Mount Athos. Caucafm by Ricciolas is faid to be 5 1 Miles in height : Gaffendm allowing it to be higher than Athos or Olympus, yet conceives it not above three or four Miles at mod; but Foffim will not yield it above two Miles perpendicular, for which he gives this very good reafon ; Polybim affirms, there is no Mountain in Greece which may not be aicended in a day's time, and makes the higheft Mountain there not to ex- ceed ten Furlongs ; which, laith (^ojjim, it is fcarce poffible for any one to reach unlels he be a Mount ainer born ; any other will fcarce be able to afccnd above fix Furlongs perpendicular ; for in the afcent of a Mountain every pace doth reach but to an h^nd-hYQdidth, perpendicular 'y but if we do allow eight Fur- longs to a day's afcent, yet thereby it will appear that the high- eft Mountains in the World are not above twenty-four Furlongs in height, fince they may be afcended in three days time : and it is affirmed of the top of Mount Caucafm, that it may be af- cended in lefs than the compafs of three days, and therefore cannot be much above two Miles in height. Which may be the eafier believed of any other Mountain, when that which is reputed Chap.4. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures aj[ferte J, J09 reputed the highefl of the World, viz, the Tike ofTenerif, which the Inhabitants call Fica de Terraria, may be afcended in that compafs of time, viz. three days : for in the months of July and Juguft (which are the only months in which men can afcend it, becaufe all other times of the year Snow lies up- on it, although neither in the IJIe of Tenerif nor zny othtr of ^- Vc^nnium the Ca^iary-Jflands there be Snow ever feen) the Inhabitants then ^^^^^- ^^=^^^^^- afcend to the top of it in three days time , which top of it is '/* ^'^^' ^^^^' not Pyramidal but plain^ from whence they gather fome fal- phureotafiones, which are carried in great quantities into Spai',2. So that according to thQ proportion of eight Furlongs to a days journey, this Fike of TenerijfmW not exceed the height of a German Milt perpendicular^ as Faren im conf^ff^thy than which he thinks likewife, that no Mountain in the World is higher. For what Pliny fpeaks of the Alps being fifty Miles in height, muft be underl^ood not perpendicular^ but in regard of the ob-^ liquity of the afcent of it ; fo that he might account fo much from the foot of the Alps to the top of them, and yet the Alps in a perpendicular line not come near the height of a German Mile. If then the higheft Mountains do not exceed much a- bove three Miles in height, ( for the Spaniards themfelves af- firm, that thofe lofty Mountains of Peru^ in comparifbn of which, they fay, the Alps are but like Cottages^ may be afcen- ded in four days compafs,) we fee from hence then far greater probability, how the ivaters in the time of the general Flood might over-top the higheft Mountains. Efpecially.lf it h^ made evident that there is fb great an Se^. 6^ ^Abyffe of fubt err aneom waters^ that the breaking open of the Fountains of it may fb much encreafe the inundation arifing from the Clouds^ and from the breaking in of the Ocean upon the main Land. And that there is fuch a mafs of Waters in the body of the Earth, is evident from the Origin of Foun- tains ; for the opinion of Arifiotle imputing them to the con- denfation of Air in the caverns of the Earthy and that of other Thilofophers a(cribing them to the fall of rain-water received into fuch Cifterns in the Earth which are capable of receiving it, are both equally unfatisfaBory^ unlefs we fuppofe a inafs of waters in the bowels of the Earth, which may be as the com- mon jiock to fapply thofe Fountains with. For it is very hard, conceiving how mere Air (hould be fo far condenfed^ as to caufs liot 510 Origines Sacr^t : Book IIL not only fuch a number oi Fountains, but ^o great a quantity of water as runs into the Sea by tho^Q Rivers which come from them, ( as the River Volga is fuppofed to empty fo much wa- ter in a years time into the Cafpian Sea, as might fuffice to co- ver the whole Earth J by which hkewife it is moft evident that there muft be fome fubterranean parages in the Sea, or elfe of neceffity, by that abundance of water which continually runs into it from the Rivers, it would over-flow and drown the World. And from this multitude o^ waters which comes from Fountains, it is likewife evident, that the Origin of Foun- tains cannot be merely from fuch water w^hich falls from the Clouds, which would never fuffice to maintain fo full and un- interrupted ?iftrearn as many Fountains have: Efpecially if that be true which fome afTert, that rain-water doth neves moiften the Earth above ten foot deep, for of far gv^dt^v profundity ma- ny Fountains are. And belides, the rain-water runs moft upon the furface of the Earth, and fo doth rather fvvell the Rivers which thereby run with greater force in their paifage to the Ocean, and doth not lodge it felf prefently in the Earth , efpe- cially if it defcends in a greater quantity, which alone is able to fill fuch Cifierns fuppoled to be in the Earth, efpecially in Mountains, which may keep a flream continually running. Although therefore we may acknowledge that the fall of rain maj much conduce to the over-flowing and continuance of Foun- tainsy as is evident by the greater force of Springs after conti- nued rains, and by the decay of many of them in hot and dry weather, (which yet I had rather impute to the Suns exha- ling by his continued heat thofe moift vapours in the Earth, which fliould continually fupply the Springs, than merely to the want of Rain,) and by the rife of raoft great Rivers from fuch Fountains which came from tht foot of Mountains ; where the ground is fuppofed to be of fo hard and confident a fub- flance, as ftone, or chalk, or fomething of hke nature, which might help to the confervation of water there, from whence it after ran in ftreams to the Ocean, (which was the great ar- v.G.iJfend.'vit. gumcnt of the famous Feireskiui for this opinion,) although Peireskii.l. 3. I fay, thefe things may argue thus far, t\\'dt rain-water doth P- ^'J^' much conduce to the prefervation of 5/?n>^/, yet it cannot I give a fufficient account of the Origin of them : Which with the greatefl reafon and probability is imputed to thofe fubter- raneom \ Chap.4. The Divine Authority of ihe Scriptures ajfertedt, f ii raneoHS waters which pafs up and down through the bowels of the Earth. Some have fanfied the Earth to be as one great Animalj whofe fubterraneous pajfages where Hke veins in the body, which received water out of the Sea, as the veins do blood out of the Liver ; and that there are fome Idnd of hot vapours in the Earth which fupply the place of vital fpirits^ which are difFufed up and down the body through the arte- ries. And that as in an animal, there are Ibme parts which upon the k^ii prick do fend forth blood, and others are more callous where the incifton raufi: be deeper before any blood ap- pears ; lb it is in the Earth, when it is opened in a right vein we find prefently a Spring of water ; but if w^e 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 afcends into the head as it runs into the legs, be- caufe it is equally difperfed into all the parts from the center of it J ib in the body of the Earth it is as natural for the wa- ter to afcend into the tops of Mountains, as it is to fall down into the center of the Earth. And that it is no more wonder to fee Springs iifue out of Mountains, than it is to fee a man bleed in the veins of his fore-head when he is let blood there. So in all places of the Earth the parts of it are not difpofed for apertion-, for fome of them are fo hard and cowpaB, that there feems to be no paffage through them, ( which is the moft probable reafbn , why there is no rain neither in thofe places, becaufe there is no fuch exfudation of thofe moift va- pours through xh^ fur face o^ th^ Earth, which may yield mat- ter for rain, as it is in many of the fandy places of Africa \ but ufually mountainous Countries have more large, and as it- were Temple-veins through which the moift vapours have a free and open palTage, and thence there are not only more frequent Springs there, but Clouds and Rains too.) Now if this account of the Origin of Springs in the Earth be as rational as it is ingenious and handfome, ( and there is not much can be faid againft it, but only that then all Fountains fliould htfalt as the water is from whence they come,) then we eafily underfland how the Earth might be over- flowed in the univerfal Deluge ; for then the Fountains of the deep were broken up, or there was an univerfal opening of the veins of the Earthy whereby ail' f 1 1- Origines Sacra! : Book IH. all the water contained in them would prelently run upon the furfcice of the Earth, and muft needs according to its propor- tion advance its felf to a confiderable height. But becaufe the falving the difference of the water in Springs from what it is in the Sea is fo confiderable a 'Phenomenon in our prefent caie, I. therefore rather take this following as the moft rational ac- count of the Origin of Fountains^ viz. That there are great cavities in the Earthy which are capable of receit^ing a confi- derable quantity of water ^ which continually runs into them from the Sea^ ( which as it continually receives fre(h fupplies from the Rivers which empty themfelves into it, lb it dif- patcheth away a Hke quantity thorow thofe fpungy parts of the Earth under the Ocean^ which are moft apt to fuck in and convey away the furplufage of water,) fo that by this means the Sea never fwells by the water conveyed into it by the /?/- 'vers^ there being as continual a circulation in the body of the Earth of the water which palfeth out of the Ocean into the fubterraneom Caverns^ and from thence to the Mountains^ and thence into the Sea again ; as there is a circulation of blood m man's body from the heart by the arteries into the exteriour partSy and returning back again by the veins into the heart. According to which we may imagine fuch a place in the heart of the Earth like Plato's BaratrurUj As Plato in his Phadrm defcribes it out of Homer, a long and ^ deep fubterraneom cavity, «V >^ -t^t^ to ^7^ cvl>pi^ai tz ircLvTi^ it THiTAJM)}, id) ^ TtfT» 'STct A/J/ 'TTCtVTS^ C4i§i\i^r;^, according to the computation of Joh. Buteo comes to 450000 Jktteo dc area folld cubits. For the length of ;oo cubits being multiplied in- Noe. p.^y to the breadth of fifty cubits, and th^produB by the height of ' 30 cubits makes the whole Concavity 450000. Which Mat- thaM Chap.4- ^^^ Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted, 5* i j ths.'m Hoftm reducing to the German meafurey makes the longi- Hop'M de fa^ tude of the Ark to be 3 1 perches^ 4 cubits, 5 fingers 5 the la- ^^^^a Area titude 5 perches, 2 cubits and 1 1 fingers ; the altitude 3 perches ^''^^' ^*' ^^ I cubit y 9 fingers ; allowing to every perch i $ Roman feet. So that if we take z perch to contain 10 Hebrew cubit s, which ex- ceeds the former 1 1 fingers, the whole capacity of the Ark will be 450 cubical perches. And as he faith, Hujufmodi fane adi- ficii amplitudo capaciffima efi, & quamlibet magno animantium numero haud dubie fufficere potuit, the Ark of fo large a capa- city might eafily contain the feveral kinds of animals in it. Which will be eafily underftood, if according to our former fuppofttion, only the animals of the inhabited part of the world were preferved in the Ark \ but admitting that all kinds of animals were there, there would be room enough for them, and for provifion for them. For which Sir JV.Rawleigh gives a prudent caution, that men ought not to take j/^iw^/y of a mixt nature^ as Mules and Hyana's, nor fuch as differ in fize and (hape from each other, as the Cat oi Europe, andOwncc oi India, into th^ kvcvdl fpecies of animals. Sir rv. Rawleigh following Buteo reckons 89, or leaft any -be omitted, a 100 feveral kinds of beafls, and undertakes to demonftrate from a triple proportion of all beafts to the Ox, Wolf, and Sheep, that there was fufficient capacity for them in the Ark. Hojlus al- lows a 150 feveral kinds of animals, yet queflions not the ^tz^- pacity of the Ark. But thefe things are fo particularly made out by thofe learned Authors, efpecially by Buteo, that I fliall rather referr the Reader for further fatisfa(ftion to the Authors themlelves, than take the pains to tranfcribe them. I come now therefore to the evidence of the truth and certainty of this univerfal deluge, of which we have m^oft clear and concurring Teftimonies of mod ancient Nations of the world. For which purpofe Grotius and others have at ^. Cnt, Jurat. large produced the teftim.ony ofEerofus the Chaldean out of 7^- '"» ^•'- ^^ ^^''''^ fephus, concerning the Flood and the^r^^ in which Noah was ^y^^' ^^l^^' preferved, of Abidenus out of Cyril and Eufebius concerning cb-QKoiog' dif. XifuthruSyOT Noah's fending out of the birds to fee if theFloody^T/^.4.^.2.c^ 3, w^ere alTuaged, and of Alexander Folyhiflor concerning the pre- ^ochar. Geogr. fervation of animals in the Ark, of Plutarch concerning th^-^rV^''^^'c/ fending out of the Dove^ of Lucian de Dea Syria concerning the o,/^ Kf/, \. il. whole fiory, aad lb of Melon and Nicolaus Damafcenus. Bcfides c.i^. & ibid. U u u 2 it ^«^' ^'^■'V' yilJ Origines Sacr^ : Book HI. it is manifefted by others, how among the Chaldeans the me- mory of Noah was preferved under the Fable of Oannes^ which had part of a/y^, and part of a man^ as is evident from the Eufeb.chr.f.^. fragments of JpoIlodorti6y Abydenm^ and Alexander Folyhift or ^ ed. 2. preferved in Eufebm his (freek Chronica ; among the Chinefes Scaliger. under the name of Puoncim, who by them is faid to have efca- ped alone with his Family out of the univerfal Deluge, faith If. Voff. epi'j}. tf^^^ Vojfim^ who fuppofeth Fn or Pi to be only a Frefix to adeoiviHm,^. the name, and fo that TuoncuuSy is the fame with o n«x<^. 409- ^ Martin'uiA tells us, de diluvio multa efi apud Sinicos Scriptores ^Sini'c'^ufn ^^^^'^^^ ^^^"^^^ ^^"^^ ancient Writers of the Sinick Hiftory fpeak loh^'deLaet^.'de much of the Flood, Johames de Laet tells "out of Lefcharbo- "trig. gent. ^me- twi how couftaut the tradition of the Flood is among the In- rhan.l.i.p.ii^. dia?is, both in New France^ Feru, and other parts. This be- ing therefore fo fully attefted by the evident and apparent con- lent of fo many Writers and Hiflorians^ which did not own the authority of the Scriptures, I fliall fuppofe this fufficiently proved, and proceed to the main thing which concerns the Origin of Nations^ which is, the certainty of the propagation of mankind from the pofierity of Noah. Of which there is this ftrong and convincing evidence, that in all that account which the Scripture gives of the propagation of Nations from the Sons of Noahy there is fome remainder in the Hiftory of that Nation to juftifie the reafon of the impofition of the name from the names of the Nations themfelves, which have preferved the original name of their Founder in their own, as the Medes from Madai ; the Jhracians from Thiras ; the lonians from Ja- Gro. Mnot. ad '^^^ » the Sidomans from Sidon ; the Philifiins from Fole^him ; /. I. de Verit. the Arcaans^ AradianSy Elym^ans^ Afyrians, Lydians^ from Ar- y^ri. Montan. ^/^ Arad^ Ekm^ Affur and Lud^ and many others produced Phaleg.^^ I^y QY-otim^ Montanus^ Junius ^ and efpecially Bochartus^ who 10. Bo:hart. with admirable induftry and learning hath cleared all this part Geogr.Sacr.p.i. of f acred Hifiory^ which concerns the reafon of the impofition of the names of the people which were propagated from the pojierity of Noah^ and given a full and fatisfaftory account of the feveral /?/^r^j where tht pofierity of Noah ieated themfelves after the deluge. Inftead of that therefore, I iliall confider the pretences which can be brought againft it, which are chiefly thefe three, i. That the Chaldean Empire feems to have greater antiquity than can be attributed to it by the Hi- ftory chap. 4 . The Divine Authority of i he Scriptures aJferteJ, 517 ftory of Mofes. 1, That the mod learned Heathen Nations pretend to be felf-orjginated^ and that they came not from any other Country. 3. That no certain account is given from , whence America (hould be peopled. I. The Hiftory of the Ajfyrian Empire feems inconfiftent SeS, 9, with the propagation of the world from the fons of Noah', for the reign of Ninus and Semiramis is placed by many Chronolo^ gers within the firft Century after the Flood , which feems a manifeft inconfiftency with the propagation of mankind from the fons of Noah j for it feems utterly impoffible that thQ foun- dations of lb great an Empire (liould be laid in fo fmall a com- pafs of time by the pofterity of three perfons j and befides, Ni- Tins and Semiramis were not the firfl: w'ho began the JJfyrian Empire ; for Belus not only reigned fifty five years before iV/- »«j, but according to the Chaldean Antiqiiitiks from Evechous^ who they fay firft reigned among them , are reckoned 495 years. But admit that the beginning of the Ajfyrian Empire be placed fo low as Tetavius and other Chronologers w^ould have Pefav. de d^B, it, viz, in the year after the Flood, 153, yet the difficulty ^^^P- i-s-c h^ is only fomewhat abated, but not removed j for it feems y^t '^°^' "* unconceivable that from three perfons in 150 years, fuch mul- titudes (hould fpring,as to make fo large an Empire as that of Ninus^ and that within an hundred years after the Flood there (hould be fuch vaft multitudes for the building the Tower of Babel and difperfion up and down the w^orld, fo that according to the Hebrew computation in the cqmpafs of 300 years, viz. a- bout Abraham^ time , the world was fo fully peopled , that we read of feveral Kings encountring one another, by which it is evident the world had been peopled fome time before, or el(e there could not have been fuch potent Kings as fome of them were at that time. This being the grand difficulty, to ; it I anfwer thefe things. I. There is no fuch certainty of the beginning of the Affy- rian Empire^ as for the fake of that, to queftion the truth of the propagation of the world by the fons of Noah, I have- already largely manifefted the want of credibility in the Chro- nology of the ancient Chaldeans^ and that we have no certain grounds to rely upon in reference to it. Efpecially as to thefe 1 feven firft Babylonian KingSy which are cited out of Africans, by EufebiuSj and Georgius Syncelks^ viz, EvechouSy Chomasbo-- Ins, 5 1 8 Origlnes Satra; : Book IIL hs^ ToriiSy NecJmheSy Ahius^ Oniballus^ ChinziruSy who are fai'd to reign 215 years two months; and alike fabulous, I fuppofe!, is the other Dynafty of fix Arabian Kings ^ whole Empire is laid to have flood 215 years to the time of Belus^ who ex- pelled the Arabians^ and took the power to himfelf ; And it is much more agreeable to reafon to rejed thele two Dyna- ftyef^ which have no record of them left in any Hiftory of the Ajfyrian Empire^ but only in Berofus^ whofe authority in this cafe hath been difcuffed already, than to follow our late excel- lent Frimate of Armagh, who pundVually fetsdown the reign of the Kings of thefe two Dynaftyes, but cuts off at leafl: eight Ages in the time of the Ajfjrian Empire from Ninns to Sarda- napalusy which time he confines to 496 years, and placeth xjffer. Amiale: Ninus in the 1737 year of the World, according to the He- Vtt.iefl.A.M, y^^ computation, and fo to live in the time of the Judges, and ^^^^* be contemporary with Deborah : Which he builds only on a place in Herodotus, which relates not to the time between Ni- nias and Sardanapalus, but to the time of the defeBion of the Cajiigat. adv. ^'^^^des from the Ajfyrian Empire, as Ifaac VoJJiits hath already Honiium, c. lo. fhewcd. We cannot then find any certainty in the beginning Gen. 9. 1. of the Affyrian Empire, which may give us caufe to queftion the propagation of the world from the pofterity of Noah. 2. \¥e have reafon to think that there was a more than ordinary muhipUcation of the world from the fons of Noah af- ter the Flood. For as God had before puniflied the world by deftroying mankind in it by an extraordinary manner; fo af- ter the Flood, he doth in a particular manner blefs Noah and his /rw, and faid unto them, Be fruit full and multiply, and re- plenijJj the earth, which may well be thought to have then had an extraordinary eiFe6t. Several ways have been attempted by learned men to make appear, to what a vaft number th6 po- fterity of Noah would increafe in the fpace of two or three '\tav. de do- hundred years after the Flood. Fetavius fjppofeth that the hin.templ.^. poflerity of Noah might beget children at feventeen, and that • H- each of J\W;'s fons might have eight children in the eighth year after the Flood, and that every one of thefe eight might beget eight more; by this means in onely one Family, as of 7^- phet in the year after the Flood 238, he makes a Diagrawme prfer. chmal. confiding of almoft an innumerable company of men. Johan?ies ii..,r. c. 5. TemporarinSj as our mofl learned Frimate tells us, takes this way, chap. 4 . The Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted, 519 way, that all of the pofierity of No^ih^ when they attained twenty ye^irs of Jge, had every year tivins, on which fuppofi- tion by Arithmetical progrejjion, he undertakes to make it ap- pear, that in the 102 year after the Flood, there would be of males d.nd females 1554420, but takii^g away the one half, be- caufe of the groundlefs fnppofition of txpins, yet then in that time there would be ;886o5 males befides females. Others fuppofe that each of the fons of Noah had ten fons, and by that proportion, in few Generations it would amount to many thoufands within a Century. Others infift on the parallel be- tween the multiplication of the children of Ifrael in ^gypt ; that if from 71 men in the fpace of 215 years there are pro- created 600000, how many will be born of three men in the fpace of an hundred years? fome havefaid above 23000, but with what fuccefs in their Arithmetick, I iliall not determine. Hmt. defenf. But whether all or any of thefe ways be fufficient, and fatis- diprt.de ^tat, fa(ftory, we have yet caufe to believe that there w^as a more ^"^^'? ^- ^^• than ordinary multiplication in the pofterity of Noah after the Hood. 5. If we embrace the account of thofe Copies, which the Septuagint followed in their verfton, all this difficulty is then ceafed. For that account doth very much inlarge the times, and makes almoft a thoufand years between the Flood and A- braham, by which means there will be fufficient fpace given for the propagation of mankind, the building the Tower of Babel, the difperfion oi Nations, th^ founding thtAjfyrian Empire, the plantation of z^gypt, China, and other places, all which feem to have been in that time, and to concurr with that compu- tation, as well as Jofephus doth, and the whole Frimitive Church before Hierom, which certainly ought in no cafe to be. difregarded. The whole contr over fie concerning this part of the Chrono- logy of the World comes at laft to this. Whether it be more probable that the Jews who lived under the fecofid Temple (who then were the Truftees to whom were committed the Oracles of God) whom the LXX. followed in their verlion, had the true reading, or the Talmudick Jews after their dif- perfion and baaifl^ment from their Country, when they were difiarded by God himfelf from being his people, when he broke up houfe among them at the deftruBion of Jerufalem and the Temple^ 510 Origines Sacra : Book III. Temple, But if the Reader defire further fatisfafl-ion concern- ing this difference of this Chronology of the LXX. from that of the prefent Hebrew Copies^ he may confult the learned differ- Proleg. ad hi hi. tat ton of the late learned Bifhop of Chefter upon the LXX. Polyglot. caM- and the latter difcourfes of Jfaac VoJ]m on this fubjed. Set- ^ 53, 63,ev. ^ ^|-^jg ^l^^j^ ^{^g controverlie between the prefent Hebrew LXX. i72terp.& Coptes and the i>XX. m point or integrity and incorruption atap. mund. which I meddle not with, I cannot but fubfcribe to the judg- ment of our judicious Hiftorian, Sir pv. Rawleigh : That if we Hiftory of the look over all and do not haftily fatisfie our underftanding with the Wor]d,p.j.h.2. fiyfi things offered J and thereby being fatiated do flothfully and [ ^. I- fs^'T- drowfily fit down^ we fliall find it more agreeable rather to follow the reckoning of the LXX. who according to fome editions make it above 1072 years between the Flood and Abraham'/ Birthy than to take away any part of thofe 352 years given. For if we advifedly confider the ft ate and countenance of the World ^ fuch a^ it woi in Abraham'/ time, yea before Abraham was born, wefloall find that it were very ill done of m by following opinion without the guide of reafon, to pare the time over deeply between Abra- ham and the Flood ; becaufe in cutting them too near the quick, the reputation of the whole ft ory might perchance bleed thereby, were not the Teftimony of the Scriptures fupream, fo a^ no objetiion can approach it ; And that we did not follow withall tlm precept of St. Aufiin, that wherefoever any one place in the Scriptures may be conceived difagreeing to the whole, the fa?ne is by ignorance of mif interpretation underftood. For in Abraham'/ time all the then known parts of the world ivere peopled : all "Regions and Countries had their Kings, .^.gypt had m.any magnificent Cities., and fo had Palxftine and all bordering Countries , yea all that part of the world beftdes cu> far as India : and thofe not built with fticks, but of hewn ft ones, and defended with Walls and RampierSy which magnificence needed a parent of more antiquity than thofe other men have fuppofed. And therefore where the Scriptures are plaineft and beft agreeing with reafon and nature, to what end fhoidd we labour to beget doubts and fcruples, or draw all things • into wonders and marvels f giving alfo ftrength thereby to com- mon cavillers, and to thofe men^s apifh brains who only bend their wits to finj'impoffibilities and monfters in the ft ory of the world and mankind Thus far that excellent Hiftorian, whofc words dcferve confideration. Thus much for the firfl: ohjeiiion. The Chap.4- T^^^ Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajfertei, f -ii The fecond is, From the great pretence -of fever al ISdtms that Ss/6'>erpecially fiich as lay between the Ocean and Mediterrajiean Sea ; and fo both Greece and Italy come under the name of the Ifles of the Gentiles; Among the Tons of Japhet none is conceived fo probable to have firft peopled Greece^ as he whofe name was preferved among the hbabitants of Greece with ve- ry little alteration. And fo as thQ Medesfvom Madai, the uiffyria77S from JjJMr^ tYi^ Tbracians from Tbiras^ by the like Analogy the lonians from Javan. From which it is obferva- ble, that although among the Grt'^/^j theinfelves, the lonians were but as one divijion oithzt people which inhabited Greece^ yet other Nations comprehended all under the name oi loiiians, For which we have fufficient evidence from Hefychim and the Hefjch.v.^lctv- Scboliafl on Ariftophanes. ol (^l^Cctest T^i^'EKhiwct^^ieovA^ kiyi^tny^ VI. SfhoLm^- faith Hefycbim ; and more to this purpofe the Scholiaft fpeaks. AcharmnI TLavizt^ Tis'^EA?^}HVAs'litGVA^ ol ^d^Cct^t ly.a.K^v. For 'Idovii with the Infertion of the o^olick Digamma (which is always done stephmm dd wbcn two Vowcls meet) is 'U>of5?, i. e. Javones^ and Stepha^ Urh. ^. 'icoy. ^;^ Bybantim tells us, that from 'i^'^;/ comes 'Igj;', and fo HomeVy, Horn. I. ». *'Efr3* i? Bo/^to/ )y ''IcLovii 5A;c^-4- ing polTefted by the Arcadians, it was inhabited by a barbarom '^' pe&ple, who becatfe they' were, expulied their Co;^;?;r/ before moon-rifing^ 'the ^rc^^/W^ called themfelves <^a>/V Storks ^ ^atUj -jrAtfVfu;. for their frequent removals, from place to place : and Taujanioi mentions their being under the AcronoU at Athens : that they were in Theffaly^ is evident from Hef)'chius: TitKA] ol ^c^hol' TohvTrhAvn-nv.',, Arcadia ieems to have the firfi or chief phcc of their refidencs^ for the Arcadians who were accounted '^(iKAioTAlA i^vn r^ saawv^hj do vindicate the founder of this- Nation^ whom they call P^/aj^w/, to themfelves, and fay he was an, ifj/y, as is well known, and are thought to be the lame with thfe s ^6 Orrgines Sacra : Bcol< III. the Tyrrhenians^ and by fome conceived to be the iirft founders of Rome, We fee what a large fpread the Pelafgi had over Greece^ which was divided after the Hellens began to appear, into 70 'TTikAo-^infiv and to ihhhjJimy as Herodotus witnelleth j and fo thefe two appear to be a very different people from one another, and not the fame under different names as is com- monly thought. fii- ^^"^ ^^ Abraham ( whofe Genealogy it was Mofes his great de- fign to recount ) they begat many other fons and daughters^ which would make it neceffary for them., to leek their habita- . tions further abroad. And th'^t Thaleg and Ragau did ^o we have the exprefs teftimony oi Epiphanim^ ^akIh 39 'iVj^u oItivJ Chap.4- 77^^ Divine Authority of the Scriptures aJferteJ, 5' 1 9 oi Q^Mi yc'^va.m. That from the age (?/Therah W thence for- ivard Phaleg and Ragau diverted toward the Clime of Europe^ to part of Scythia, and were joyned with thofe Nations from which the Thracians arofe. Several things make this not fb improbable as fome have imagined it to be ; for firft, it is the conftant acknowledgment of all fober inquirers into the origi- nal of the Greeks^ that Greece was firft peopled from Scythia ; and indeed almoft all the Nations in Europe have come out of that Country : befides there is evidence of it, even in the Gre-^ cian Fahks ; for Trometh€U6 ( from whom the Greeks derived themfelvcs ) is fanfied by them to lie bound in Mount Cauca- . fH6, which muft be fuppoJed to be the Country from whence he came. Again, it is evident already that the Hellens came not into Greece before it was peopled by the Velafgi^ and that thefe had different language and cuft orris from one another ; now then in all probability, although the pofterity of Elifa might come firll: down from Scythia into thofe parts, and feat themfelves in Adacedonia and Thefaly^ where they had in pro- bability morf than room enough at firft and a Country to their defire : they might be willing to permit the pofierity of^ Phaleg to pafs on further ; for jn thofe firft plantations we cannot otherwife conceive, but that the lafi comers muft be the furthefi goen ; unle/s they had ftrength enough to drive the former inhabitants out of thQiv feats whereof they were already pof- feifed, as the Scythians did after wards, and fo the Hellens : So then the pofterity of Fha/eg being forced to quit their own Country becaufe of the multitude of inhahit'onts^ muft be fupr pofed to take that cowfe^ where in probability they might find an empty feat fit for them to dwell in ; thence they come to- wards iE'^^rr;/?^ ; for they faw how thQ pofterity o^Sem did fpread itsfelfl>/^p^r J already, znd Cham. Southward, and coming to part of that vaft Country of Scythia, which was both already taken up and not fo convenient an habitation for them, they draw downwards towards Thracia, and there the pofterity of Thiras, from whom the Thracians came, had already poirelled themfelves ; paffing further into Theffaly, they find that alrea- dy planted by fome of the pofterity o(Eiifa, but as yet but fcant and thin of inhabitants } therefore they difperle themfelves Y y y ' up 530 Origines Sacra : Book III. tip and down through fome part of Epirm^ moft part of Ellas^ and fome pais into Velopomefm, where they fix themfelves chiefly upon Arcadia^ and thence fpread up and down, by de- grees towtirds the Sea-fide ; lor we cannot but think that the Maritime parts were the laft peopled, partly for fear of ano- ther, dchfge, partly for want of conveniency of Navigation, mod of their travels being by Land ; and partly when Navigation grew more in ufe far fear of Pirates, who drove a great trade upon the Coafls of Greece in elder times, as is moft evident from Thucydides in the beginning of his Hiftory. Thus we have a reafonable account given of the Pelafgi their firft coming into Gretce, and how by degrees the Hellens came to polfels their Country, and what a fair pretence the Arcadians had to boafl of the greateft antiquity^ their Country being probably firft peopled by the Velafgi of any part of the whole Cberfonefe^ and the. feat of the leader of the whole company whom they call r elafgm, and the Scriptures Ihaleg. Secf, 14. Having thus far cleared the Antiquities 0^ Greece as to the firft planters of it, whom we have evidenced to have been the Telafgiy and thefe derived from Peieg, it will be no great diffi- culty to refolve what language they brought along with them, which muft be fuppofed to be the fame with that ufed in the family from whence Peleg or PhalegxamQ, as to the fubftance of it, although it might admit as great variation of Dialed: from it as the Chaldee or Syriack doth. But this I will not only fuppofe, but offer thefe probabilities for the proof of it ; the firft is, the agreement of the ancient Greek language with the Hebrew in many of its primitive words j and here we have a moft rational and probable account given of it ; which is, the Greeks mixing with the Pelafgi, and both coming to be one people, they muft needs retain many of the old words ufed by the Pelafgi in their Greek language ; which are evi- dently of an Eaftern extra6tion, the ground of which cannot with fuch probability be fetched from Cadmm and the Phoeni- cians, becaufe it is not fo eafie admiflion of a foreign Lan- guage after t\\Q perfeBion.o^ their own, unlefs by long tradt of time, or great numbers over-running the former people, nei- _ ther of which can be fb truly affirmed oi Cadmm and his com- pany ; for they were fbon driven out of Greece, he himfelf ending his days in lUiricum^ neither was their fpread ib large as Chap.4- 57;^ Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajjerted. 531 as that of the Pelafgi, who were before poOTeflbrs of the Coun- try •, and it is continually feen how impolTible it is for any Conquerors, as the Greeks were, to bring their own language fo into a place, where fome of the former people are futFered to live, and not to retain many of their old words among them, and fo make the Language mixt of both, as it is ia all Nations conquered by the Romans ; the Roman not being purely fpoken by any, but corrupted with a mixture of the former Language in ufe among them. The fecond argument -^ is from, the different pronunciation and diaktfs in ufe in the Greek language ; of which no account fo hkely can be given, as the mixture with different Languages, . This is moil evident in the Dorick Dialect ; for the Dorians inhabiting probably w^here moft of the Pelafgi had been , their pronunciation and dialed comes the neareft to the Eaftern of any of the Greeks : For in the Dorick DialeB the 'TrhAT^Adfjl^ or broad pronuncia- tion^ is moft taken notice of: So he in Theocritm upbraids the Dorians^ 077 'TrKctTHdaJ'^m di^aAcL, they fpeak every thing very broad \ which anfwers to the pronunciation of the Eafiern Languages ; beiides, the Dorick DiakEi delights much in ad- ding a to the end of words, which beOdes that it is the cuftom of Eaftern Tongjies^ efpecialjy the Syriack^ it doth much widen the pronunciation. The third Argument is from the remain- ders of the Eaftern Tongues in thofe places, efpecially where the 'Pelafgi had been. The Pelafgi are much taken notice of for their frequent removes and travelling from one place to a- nother ; which I fuppole was chiefly after the Hellens had con- quer'd the Country where they dwelt, then they were forced to go leek better habitations abroad ; thence Strabo calls the Nation of the Pelafgi 'mXyTrKoMov /f] rct-)^ to £-3-;/©- ttp^^ \7rjMA<^- Lib. 5. ^U • and elfewhere that they were 'yro^^ctyj tm? svf»^? to 'tto.- hctm 'TTKovayh^Qt, they went tip and down to a great part of Lib. 12. Europe ; but we may fuppofe them to have made their firft and chief refort to the neighbour Jflands to Gree§e \ where we fhall fee what evidence they left of their language there. The firft Ifland we meet with them in, is Creete ; fo Strabo fpeak- Lib. 5. ing of them, ^ y^ tJj? KfYivn iTroiyjot yiyvtta-iVy a^ cp-Aoiv 'Oij^v\p}i ; that a Colony of them lived in Creete , for which he voucheth Homer's authority ; ^ Y y y z "Af.Ktt i 53 ^ Origtnes Sacras t Book IIP. It is evident then that the P^/^j^i were in Cre-^/-^. Now moft of the Cretan words are of an Eaftern extraUion, if wc 7)v' Phan. believe the learned Bockartm^ who hath prom i fed a difcoiirfe Col. i.uc. IS' on that fo.h]^Ct ; befides Cr^^r^ we find the Pelafgi in C/wd^/, ^ ^0/ 3 eiiugzli lAVi^vYliKAiry^i (pA^i T»f o*(, QiTJctKicti, faith Stra- bo, the Inhabitants of €/;/(?/ fay that the Pt"/^^/ of Thejfaly were their firft Inhabitants ; and here the fore-named learned perfon hath derived the Name Chios, the Mountain Felin^uSy and the Wine Jrvifium, all from the Eoftern languages. The Lib. i. c. 9. next we find them in, is Lesbos, ^ 5^ ThJj ki(7(6ov UiKd^yiAv 6if«- ;tctir/, which from them was called i>/z2/§;/^, faith Strabo, whofe name is likewife fetched out of the Eaft. By Bochartiis fur-- G£9gr.p.z.ii.thtv we find them in Lemnos and Jmbros : Co Antic/ides in f. 12. Strabo, f^s^Tn^ if«ffv ii£A<*5';}/«$ ret inii h'^^u.vov'^'i^^^v >c'n<^i ; 'con- cerning whofe names, fee Bochartus 82. I know that learned Author makes the rhxnicians the Authors of all thefe ;?^wf/, from no other ground generally, but becaufe they are of an Eaftern derivation ; but according to what we have laid down, we may yield to the thing it felf, and upon clearer grounds \ for of fome of thefe Jfiands he ingenuoufly confelfeth he 'can find no evidence of the Phcenicians being in them. Phcenices Lib. I. r. 9. in his Infiilis habit a^e n^fquam legimus : but \\^e find it very plain, that in thofe very IJIar/ds the Pelafgi inhabited j and whether account then be more probable, let the Reader judge. One thing more I (liall infift on, which is the Original of the 6"^- mothracian Myfteries : That thele v^^ere as to their names- fvom the Eaftern languages, is now ackncvvledged by all learned men, the Cabiri being fo evidently derived from 'yy^, which figni- fies ftrength agd power, i. e. the Dii potes , fo Cabiri is ex- ikfpea, c, 8. plained by Varro and Tertullian, and the particular names o£ the feveral Cabiri mentioned by the Scholia^ on ApolhniuSy ^A^tifof, ^A^iomem, 'A^iou^ffQ- and KclJ^fX4\Q- are very handibm- ly explained by that learned and excellent Bochartus from the Eaftern languages ; only he will needs have them derived from the thi^nicians, whereas Herodotus exprefly tells us that they were iJb. I . <•. J 2. Chap. 4 . The Divine Authority of i he Scriptures aJferteJ, 533 were from the Pelafgi, whofe \vo\ ds are thcie ; oV?^ 0 rd Kct- Li^. 2. I^itfay %f}tet fxiy.vmctt Tct 'SA^uo^fiU■/A; i^Ti^iaat KetCovTi^ r^c/. lis- -^ Ka.fTyiv : And a^aill, Tt/ji) "^ ^AUO^^Ya>{.\iJj oiK^y 'TT^cTifjv TlzKet7pt Zni 111 'TTA^' 'A^LuiAiQai jvvcixjii iyi'Oi'']Q, xj ^ the old Hetrurians were certainly a Colony of the Pelafgi^ upon their removal out of Greece ; fo VoJJius obferves that the old ^etrufcan language (fere k "^yrk ha- -C^^-^-^^-^-^-m?. bet cim^a facrorum mmina) hath almoftall the facred appella- jj'^"'"^^* tions from the Eaftern tongues. For. which purpole it is fur- ther obfcrvable, which Grotius takes notice of, that the jus pontificum Romanorum was taken a great part from the He- trufcij and the Hetrurians had it ab Hebrcsis out of the Eaftern parts. By all which I cannot conceive but this opinion, notwith- SeB, 15, ftanding its novelty^ is advanced to as high a degree of proba- bility, as any that ftands on the like foundations ; and not only lb, but it is an excellent clue to diredt us to the Labyrinth . of Antiquities, and gives us a fair account w^hence the Eaftern Tongues came to be fo much u(ed among both the ancient Greeks and Hetrurians, One thing more this will help us to underftand far better than any falvo hath been yet ufed for it; which is the affinity fpoken of by Arius King of Laced cemon in his Letters to Onia^^ between the Jews and Laced remonia?7S : cv^i^fi h y^.zn TneJ ti -r^" ^Trct^vctT^? >t^ 'I^iJkiou or/ ei(>iv a.J\^esf,(ly. : which is explained by Jofepbus thus : ^ ^' . iMivm l/A T»i T^i'ACesf-oiiJ- otKioTrflQ". They had found in a book that the Jews and Lacedaemonians vpere of the fame ftock, from their mutual relation to Abraham. Voffius thinks the Original J^eidolli^.i of this was from thole of the pofterity of An ak^ who came into Greece, and peopled Sparta^ and would feem to have been of the pofterity t^f Abraham \ or that they were partly of the pofterity of Abraham by Agar or Ceturah , and partly of the Canaanites driven out by Jofhua: But how unlikely a thing is it (fuppofing Sparta peopled by the Canaanites, which yet is not evident.) that they lliould give out themfeives to be of that I j^5 4 Orighes Sacne : Book III. \,h.z\, flock which they had been expelled their Country by? And for the true pofterity of Abraham coming thither, as we have no ground for it but the bare alTertion, fo we have this ftrong evidence againft it, that all that came from Abraham were circumciled, as the Ijhmaelites^ Hagarens^ &c. which we never read of among the Lacedemonians, H, Grotim differs not much from the opinion of Voffim concerning the ground of this kindred between the Jews and Spartans : For in his notes on that place in the Maccabees^ where it is fpoken of, he gives this account of it. The Dorians, of whom the Spar- tans were a part, came from the ^elafgi ; the language of the Felafgi was different from that of the Creeks, as appears by Herodotus in his Clio : vi<^v ol Uz\etjy>i /^d^Ca^v yka-Tjetv hvji^. Now the Felafgi ( faith he ) are "abs difperfe, a fiattered Na- tion \ thence he fuppofeth thefe Felafgi or banidied people,^ to have come from the Confines of Arabia and Syria, in whith Xht pofterity of Abraham "md Ceturah' had placed themfelves. But I. it is uncertain whether the pofterity of Abraham by Keturah were placed fo near Canaan or no. I know Junius endeavours to find the feat of all the fons of Ceturah in Ara- lia ; but Mercer gives leveral not improbable realbns why he conceives them placed not in the Eaft of C/inaan, but in the Eaftern parts of the world. 2. We have no evidence at all of any remove of thefe fons of Abraham by Ceturah out of the , parts of Arabia^ fuppofing them placed there -, nor any reafon why they fliould be banillied thence, 3. That which was the badge of Abraham's pofterity, was never that we read of in t^fe among the Spartans-, which was Circumcijwn. Indeed in much later Ages than this we fpeak of, we read of a people among the Thracians who were circumcifed, whom the Greeks them- felves judged to be Jews. So Ariftophanes brings the Odoman- icharnenf^B. tes in. T/f twv 'OJhfjuivTuv to mQ- ciM^Ti^^.'Uv a,v' euTroTi'^^.iuv t fc. ^. (laith thQ Scholiaft) i.e. dviTiXKoVy i?\.ta.ivov7n 3 iy aTTiTthhovvj oi h^yM TO. eticfiicL y^ ouTTzoKwfuivct «TpjOf/ ctvTcL. Whercby it is plain that Circumcifion was in ule among the Thracians ; for thefe Odomantes were (faith the Scholiaft ) a people oi Thrace. - cumcifwn. So that this opinion of Grotim on that account feems not very probable. Bochartm^ who hath been fo happy in many other conje£tures, yet here gives out, unlefs it may depend upon the teftimony of Ckudim lolam in Stephantt^ Bi- De Phamc.CoL zantim, who fabuloufly derives the Jews from one Juda:ml.i. r. 22. Spartoriy who went from Thebes along with Bacchm into the Wars ; which Sparton thty might confound with another Spar- ton^ the Son^ of Fhonorens^ the Founder of Sparta \ which yet is rejected as a Fable by Taufani/u in Laconkis. Surely the. Lacedamonlans were very ambitious of kindred with the Jews^ that would claim it upon fuch grounds as thefe, efpecially at ' fuch a time when the people of the Jews were under diftrefs, and their kindred might be like to coft them fo dear ; And if they had never fuch a mind to have claimed kindred with the Jews^ they would certainly have done it upon a more plaufible teftimony than the Fable of one C/z2;^i//^ lolam^ that had nei- ther fence nor reafbn in it; and yet fuppofing his Fable true,. it had been nothing to the purpofe, without the linking ano- ther Fable to it, which was fo grofs, that even the Greeks themfelves were afhamed of it, who were always the moft da- ring forgers of Fables in the world. But let us fee further what the Divine ( as fome have loved to call him ) Jof, Scali^ Camn. ifa^, ger faith -to it : All that he faith, is only a wonder or two at it: ?• 33^- ^uid magis mirum quam Lacedamonios ab Abraham prognatos ejfe, &c, and a refutation of an abfurd opinion , that Oebalm. the Father of Tyndarem^ and Grandfather of Cajior^ VolluXy tind Helena^ was the fame with Fbal^ mentioned Gen. 10. 28. which there can bs no reafon for, iince Ebal was the Son of Joktan^ and fo of aaother race from Abraham ; and Joktan's- Sons- i i jj6 Origines Sacr^ : Book IH. Sons were placed Fa^ward^ but chiefly Oehalm was within an hundred years before the deftrudMon of Troy^ but Vhaleg Un- kle to Ebal^ died 664 years before Oehalm inJ.M.ia^^. Thus far then we cannot fincf any plaufible account of this claim of kindred : but though it be an endlefs task to make good all the claims of kindred in the world , efpecially to perfons of power and authority, yet there being no vifible intereft or de- (i^.n which the Spartans could have in fuch a claim , efpeci- ally at that time with a Nation generally hated and maligned by Heathen Idolaters^ we cannot fuppofe but there mull be fome at leaft plaufible ground for iiich a perfuafion among them. What if we Oiculd conjecture that the Spartans m\g\\t find in the Greek verfion of the Tentateuch^ which was much fpread abroad at that time among the Sons of Jjhmael^ one whofe name makes the neareft approach to their Cadmusy from whom they fuppofe themfelves derived ; for the youngeft of I/hmaers Sons was called Kedemah, Gen. 25. 15. which the Syriack renders Kedem, the very name of Cadmus in the Eafiern Tongues. But this being a light conjedure, I paj^ it by, and return to the f ibje? afione^ one by that word underftands //W, another ivater, znothtv fand^ &c. this muft needs produce a ftratige confufion among them, and enough to make them defift from their work. But fuppofing no fuch divifion of languages there, Ch ap. f. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures aJferteJ. 5*4 r there, yet after their difperfton, which might be caufed by the former confufion^ by the different Laws^ Rites ^ and Cuftoms^Com^ merce, and Trading, and Trad of Time^ there would have rifen a divifion of their feveral Tongues. But if there were fuch a divifion of Tongues miraculoufly caufed there (that as it is com- monly faid, all thofe who were of the fame language, went to- gether in their feveral companies ) whence comes it to pafs, that in their difperfion we read of feveral families difperfed, which ufed the fame language after their difperfion ? as all the fons of Canaan mentioned, 6'f».io.i5,i6,i7,i8. ufed the Cana- anitijh tongue : in Greece^ Javan and Elifa had the fame lan- guage. In zy£gypt^ Miff aim and Pathrufem', in Arabia the fons of Joktan and chm •, in Chald^a Aram and Vz the inhabitants of Syria ^ Majh of Mefopot ami a y Nimrod of Babylon-y Afur of Afyria : whence comes it to pafs if their feveral Tongues were the caufe of their difperfion^ that thefe feveral heads of families [j (hould ufe the lame tongue f Another reafon againft the com- ' mon opinion, is this, which leems to have a great deal of force in it. \f tongues were divided at Babel as it is imagined; whence was it, that the nearer any Nation lay to thole who had the pri- ' mitive language the Hebrew^ they did participate more of that tongue than thofe who were more remote, as is plain in the Chaldeans y CanaaniteSyGreekSy and others? whereas if their fa- guages were divided at Babely they would have retained their own languages as well as others. This very argument prevailed lb far with the learned IfCafaubon^ as appears by his adverfaria Diatrib. deL. on this fubjed (publifhed by the learned Dodors fon) as to Heb.p.i'],!^: make him leave the commob opinion, and to conclude the fe- veral tongues to be only Ibme variations from th^HebreWy but yet fo as many new words were invented too. Hence he ob- ferves that the Afiatick Greeks came nearer to the Hebrew than the European, And if this opinion hold true, it is the beft Pag. 47«^ foundation for deriving other languages from the Hebrew : a thing attempted by the fame learned /76"r/t>/?, as you may fee in the book fore-cited, and endeavoured by GuichardwSy Avenarim and others. Thus we fee there is no agreement in men's minds concerning the divifion of tongues at Babel, But having fet down this opinion with its reafons, I (hall ^^^' 4^ • not fo leave the received opinion^ but (liall firft fee what may be faid for that, and leave the judgment concerning the pro^ bability. ^^?. / Origines Sacr^ : Book III. " bability of either to the underftanding Reader. And it feems to be grounded on thefe reafons. i. That had it been left to men's own cbeke ; there cannot be a fufficient reafon af- lignedofthe diverlity Oi languages in the world, For there being one language originally in the world, whereby men did reprefent their conceptions to one another ; we cannot ima- gine that men fhouid of themfelves introduce fb great an al- teration^ as whereby to take off that neceflfary fociety and <:on- verfe with each other, which even nature it felf did put men Mmt. /» Gm. Upon. Hence Calvin and others conclude that prodigii loco II. 1,2. habenda eft linguarum diverfetas 5 becaule there having been that freedom of converfe among men, it is not to be fuppo- fed they fhouid of themfelves, cut it off to their' mutual dif- ad vantage. But to this it is faid, that the hng tratf of time and diverfity of cuftoms might alter the language. I grant it much, but not wholly ; and they would only therein differ in their languages, wherein their cuftoms differed . fo that there would remain i^ill fuch an agreement as whereby they might underftand each other ; which it will be hard to find in many of the eldeft languages. As for the length of time, though that doth alter much in reference to words and phrafes^ in which that of Horace holds true, Mult a renafcentar qua jam, cecidere, &c. Yet it will be yet more difficult to find where mere length of time hath brought a whole liyiguage out of ufs^ and another in the room of it. But that which I think de- ferves well to be confidered, is this, that the greateft altera- tion of languages in the world hath rifen from Colonies of Na- tions that ufed another language; and fo by the mixture of both together the language might be much altered : as the inquiries, c. Hebrew by the Lhaldees in Babylon : the Spanijh, Italian and 5, 6. others by the Latin, as Breerwood fhews, our own by the ISIor- mans and others. So that were there not a diverfity of Ian- guages fuppofed, this enter fering of people would bring no confiderable alteration along with it, no more than a Colony from l^kw England would alter our language here. And as for another caufe affigned of the change of languages, the Metho'd^lit^V'^^ff^'^^^^^ ^^ c//w-:7/'^/, which Bodin gives as the reafon why the Northern people ufe confonants and afpirates fo much , efpecially the Saxons, and thofe that live by the Baltick Sea who pronounce thus , Ver theum ferum pihimm penum finum. And chap. 5'. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures afferted, 5-43 And fo R^ D. Kimchi obferves of the Ei)hraimkes^}\x^g. 12,6, that it was the Air that was the caule of their lij^ing , and calling it Stbbokth^ as he there obferves of the men of Sar- Mayer. Prodr. pbathy that is, the French, that they could not pronunce Schin^ chddcJfm.cu but pronounced it like Thau Raphe. Bat by thefe exa?nfks we fee that this would caufe only an alter at ton as to fome kt^ ters and fyllahles, and rather as to the pronunciation^ than a- ny ^variety of the language. So that we fee that, fetting a- lide the confufion of languages at Bahel^ there can be no rea- fon fufficierit affigned for the variety of languages in the world, 2. Though it be granted, that a confafion in their minds without diftin^ languages were enough to make them defift from their work, yet the context in that place, Gtn, 11. doth inferr a diverlity of tongues , as will appear from the antece- dents and confeqMents ; as from the firft verfe, where it is not conceivable why it fhould be there taken notice of as fach a - remarkable circumftance, that then they had but one language before they fet upon this 7vork^ if there was not a diverfity of tongues caufed by the work they went about ; but efpecially *uer. 6. where God takes fuch notice of this very thing , that they had hut one language , wherein they were fo confident to carry on their work j therefore, ver.'], when he would deftroy their work by confoundijig their language , it muft be by muU tiplying that language into many more ; for it muft be taken in oppolition to what is laid in the other verfe. And what is there added, their not under ft anding one another s J^eechy feems to referr not to their inward conceptions , as though they did not underftand one anothers minds , but to the outward ex- frejfions, as T\y^ doth apparently relate to them further in "ver. 8. this is fet down as the caufe of their dtj^erfion, which had the tongue been the fame afterwards as it was before, could have been no reaibn for it. Again fome argue from the name Babel given to the place, from Vb:3, which fignifies to confound and mingle things of feveral kinds together. So ufed Judg.j^.zi. Efay 30.24. Job 6.5. &c. thence the name hj.^ for i'2i2 the middle ^ left out, as in Golgotha for Golgoltha^ Kigaltha for Kilkaltha, and others of a like nature. Belides, there feems to be fomewhat in what is faid, that the famtUes "Were divided according to their tongues^ Q^ntf. 10. 5, 20, 3 1, which doth at leaf! imply, a diverpy of tongues among them^ --^ iC 5'^4 Origines Sacra : Book III. the caufe of which muft be affigned by them who will not al- low of the confufion and divifion of languages at hahel. Fur- ther, this feems moft agreeable to Goai end in making of them thus leave off their work, that there might be not only a pre- f^nt judgment upon them, but that which might remain to fo-rerity as a note of the folly of their Anceficrs. Thofe who recede from the common opinion left they (hould give advan- tage to Infidels by attributing that to a miracle, which might be done without, feem to be more wary than wife in it. For befides that it is certain that miracles may be in thofe things which might be effeded otherwife by natural ccmfes, when they are produced without the helf of thole caufes, and in a fpace of time impoffible to nature ; and that it hath not been as yet proved how fuch diverfity of ungues as is in the world w^ould have been effe(^ed without fuch a miracle ; it muft be granted by them that there was a miracle in it ; and what greater difficulty there fliould be in the 'variety of languages^ than in the fignification of the fame -words^ 1 underftand not. But I fee no neceffity of alferting that every one of the faini- lies had a diftin(n: language^ and the common opinion of 7c. or 7?.. as the Gr families and as many languages^ is now ta- ken for a groundleis fancy by learned men : as is eafily proved Boia.Geor.l.i. from tlic dividing Father and Children, whofe families could ^'^^',- ^ot certainly be without them ; and fome fuppofed to be un- fj^ - ' born then, as Jcktan's i ; Children ; efpecially if we lay as B:ixt.diatfecJ. many do, that the Confufion was at the birth of VhaUg, and 68. J oh an was his younger brother, as the \ftws generally do. To the laft objection it may be replyed, "that the agreement of languages in feme radical words doth not infcrr the deri- 'uaticn of the one from the other, as is plain in the Verfian and German, in which learned men have obferved fo many Liffcent. ^.ep. words alike. And fo by Buibe^uim of the inhabitants about 44- Tauricke cher/cnefe ; and lb in moft of our m.odcrn tongues Bifsbeof.ep.i^. ^-j^^re may be fom.e words alike without any fuch dtpendtnce or derrjatun. Again, though it be granted that the lan- guages of them who were at Bahel were confounded, yet it is not nccciTary we fliould fiiy that all Noah^s poiicrity were \Afayer. there. It. is tliought by fome that they were chiefly C/^^??? Y^^'^^'^fi^^- P-^'znd his company ', if fo then 5^?^ and his ;>^/? em/ might re- * tai.i the Z^wj^/^/?^? they had before, only with iome 'i;'jri;7//fKi. But chap. 5'. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted, ^a^ But this is very uncertain, unlefs we take it for Hekr and Peleg^ from whole vicinity other bordering Nations might make ufe of many of their primitive ji^ords : and for the Greeks, it will be granted that many of their Ti^ords, efpecially the old Beoticky had affinity with the Hebrew j but it was from the Pelafgi at firft and Cadmm the Vhoenman afterwards ; the old Canaanittjh language, being if not the pure Hebrew^ yet a dialect of that tongm^ as is proved by many learned men. But however thele things be, it is not necelTary to fay that all Mother tongues fo called, were then exigent at that confufion : but the prefent curfe did divide their Ungaa- ges who were there, and that all divifion of languages fince, is to be looked upon as the effect of that curfe. It being thus manifefted what a ftrange confufion of lan^ guages was caufed in the world, we may thereby eafily under- ftand how the ancient tradition came to be corrupted and al- tered in the world. Another reafon of the alteration of the ancient tradition^ SeB, <> was, the fabuloufnefs of the Voets : for thefe made it their a. defign to difguife all their ancient /ori^j under Fables^ in which they were To loft, that they could never recover them after- wards. For the elder Poets of Greece being men of greater learning than generally the people were of, and being con- verfant in ^^gyp and other farts^ did bring in new reports of the ancient times which they received from the Nations they went to ; and by mixing their own traditions and o^ . ■ ^ thers together, and by fuiting what was remaining of the an- cient tradition to thefe, they muft needs make a ftrange con- fufion of things together, and leave them much more ob[cure zwdi fabulozts than they found them. And heri^in all their cunning and [ubttlty lay in putting a ne-w face on whatever they borrowed from other Nations, and making them appear among themfelves in a Greek habit ^ that the former owners of thofe traditions could fcarce challenge them as theirs under ^0 ftrange a Metamorphofis, For thofe things which were moft plain and hiftorical in the Fountains \vhence they de- rived them, they did fb tt^^rnM^ as Clemens ■ Alexanirlmts fpeaks, (or as Orig-^?2, m^.K-^TuvTii ctV^TsrAfit^raf^) wrapt them up ^^J'^^^^"- ^- ^- under fo great Mythology that the Original Truths cm hardly ^^■^' '"*' be dilcerned, becaufe of that multitude of prodigwm fables^ A a a a with 1 t- j^S Origines Sacrce : Book flL with which they have inlaid them. But as great as their anijice was in the doing this, we may yet difcern apparently many of thofe particular ccurfes which were taken by them to dijguife and alter the pri?97itive tradhicn. I. Attnhiitmg what was done by the great Anccfcrs of mankind to feme perfons of their own Nations. Thus the Jhejjahans make Deucalim to be the perfon who efcaped the flood ^ and from whom the world was peopled after it. And whoever compares the relatkn of tht flood of Deucalion in Afoilodorus with that in the Scrlfturey might eafily render ^ y, , ,.,,. ApoUodonts his Greek in the Ian2-t4ag-e of the Scriptures, onlv Q^^^^,^. 10. changing Greece into the whole earthy and Deucalion into Noah^ FarnaJJm into Ararat^ and Jupiter into JehG%;ah. On the fame account the Athenians attribute xh^ flood to Ogyges^ not that the flood of Ogyges and Deucalion were particular and diflmd: deluges^ which many have taken a great deal of needlefs pains to place in their leveral ages : But as Deucalion was of the eldeft memory in Theflaly^ fo was Ogyges at A- thens, and Co the flood as being a matter of remoteft Anticjui- ty^ was on the fame account in both places attributed to both thefe. Becaufe as mankind was fuppofed to begin again af- ter the floods fo they had among them no memory extant of any elder than thele two, from whom on that account they fuppofed mankind derived. And on the fame reafon it may be fuppofed that the AJjyrians attribute the flood to Xi' futhrm^ whom they fuppofed to be a Kmg of Aj]yria'\ but the circumftances of the ftory as delivered by Alexander Po^ j^pud Cyril c. lyhtflor^ and Abydenm^ are fuch as make it clear to be only Julian, h'b.t I. a remainder of the univerfal flood which happened in the time of Noah, So the TheJJalians make Vromethem to be the Frotoclafi ; the Teleponnefians Vhoronem , as Clemens AUxandrinm tells US, whom fhoronides the Tott calls Tare^ Strm. /. I. '^ dLv^^toTnav, The Father of mankind. This may be now the firft way of corrupting the ancient tradition^ by fuppofing all that was conveyed by it to have been a6ted among them- felves. which may be imputed partly to their ignorance of the flate of their ancient times^ and partly to their pride^ left they (hould feem to come behind others in matters of Anti(\uity, a. Another Chap. 5'. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures afferted. jy^y 2. Another fountain of Heathen Mythology, was the ta- king the Idiom of the Oriental languages in a proper fence, i'or whether we fuppofe the ancient traditions were con- veyed to them in the ancient Hebrew by the Telafgi , or WTre delivered to them by the Thcenicians, or were fetched out of the Serif tures themfelves (as fome fuppofe, though im- probably of Homer and fome ancient Toets) yet all thefe Ic- veral ways agreeing in this, that the traditions were Ori- ental, we thereby underftand how much of their Mythology came by taking the Hebrew in a proper and literal ferxe with- out attending to the Idiom of^the tongue. From hence Bo- charters hath ingenioufly fetched many Heathen Fables. Thus when Noah is faid to be nQlb^n ty*^ Gen.^. 20. which in the Idiom of the Hebrew only fignifies a husband- man, they took it in a proper fence for 0 «>«? -nn y^^, and thence Saturn who was the fame with Noah (as will appear afterwards) is made by Mythologtfis the husband of Rhea which was the fame with the Earth ■ So the Gyants making war again ft Heaven, was only a Poetical adumbration of the defign at the building of Babel, whofe ?op in the Scripture is faid to reach D'Qiyii which in the Hebrew fignifies only Gen. u. 4. "di great height', but to aggrandix^e the Story, was taken in the literal interpretation that they attempted Heaven. So when they are faid to fight againft the Gods, Bochartm thinks it might be taken from that phrafe of Nimrod, that he was a mighty hunter T^'STV U£;4 before the Lord we render it, but it fometimes fignifies againfi the Lord. So what Abydenus j^pud Eufeh. laithof the Gyants, that they v/ere \x> tys? yri^ dvcL^vnu thofe Pra^. Evmg.l that came out of the earth, is fuppoled to be taken from that 9' fhrafe. Gen. 10. Ii. ^'i1 ^p^'t JJ3i ^ t(!rra ipfa exiit. But far more likely and probable is that which learned men are generally agreed in concerning Bacchm his being born of Ju- piters thigh, which is only an expreilion of that Hp.bratfm ^)^'i^ IDI' wherein coming out of the thigh is a phrafe for ordinary q^^^ ^ ^ procreation. ;. A third way oblervable, is^ the alteration of tht na?ms in the ancient tradition, and putting names of like importance ^' to them in their own language. Thus Jupiter who was the fame with Cham, was called Ziu^ n^^. tIjm ^i^v, as^DH, from pQn fervere, incalefcere. ''A^.^.^v i^ 'AtyjTrltot y^K'^aoi r A a a a 2 -^^ct* 5-48 Origtnes Sacrce :. Book lilt aU, faith Herodotm y him whom t]K Greeks QdW^^vi, the z^g)'ftiavs call Cham, So J^vheth, whofe memory was pre- ferved under Neptune, to whoft portion the IJlanJi in the Phakgl.i.ca^. ^^^ ^^^^^ ^^'^s called by the Greeks iioni//.f tran Hated by Phtlo Bybluts out of Sanchoniathon\ wherein W€ Syris. j.^2d of the God ii''^, which hath the fame letters with TWVs''^ Bochart.^c^na, tj^.fjj^s which there wc meet with ^-a/«>, the fame with jv^y the moft Fligh y and "IaO-, which is ^'^^ the ftrc?jg God ; Beelfamafiy Chap. J. The Divhe Authority of the Scriptures ajferted, < Beelfaman, which is, X'l:^ ^yD tk God of Hea'ven, and , EAiy's/V, the very name of God ufed in the beginning of Ge- nefis fo often. Befides, in t'aok fragments we have exprefs mention of the Chaos ^ and the et^entng following it, or the darknefs on the face of the Deep ; the Creation of Angels under the (^c^K£pV©- or Saturn, under whom the Greeks pre- ferved the memory of Adam ; for Diodorus, Thallus, CaJJius, Seuerus, and Cornelius Nepos, do all (as TertuUian fmth) COn- /ip9log,c. iq. fefs Saturn to have been a man 5 and according to their Fa- bles, he mull have been the firfi of men, Saturn was the Son of Heaven and Earth, and -fo was Adam : h^ taught men hus- bandry ; and was not Adam the firft that tilled the ground .? Befides, that power which Saturn had, dLnd was depofed from, doth fitly fet out the Dominioi} man had in the Golden Age ©f I 21. fcr * Orighes Sacne : Book HI. / of hmocenc)' which he loft by his own folly. And Adam^^ hiding himlelffroni theprefence of theZ5r//,gaveocca(ion to the name oi Saturn^ from Satar to hide. We find fomething o^-Cain pre- lerved'in thQ Pbcenician ^?zfi^«i^/^j, under the name ofA^f^jif©- or' Ay^9THi, the firft Gonntryman or Husbandman, who with his brother 'A^'f^ J built houfes,and the firft foundation of aCity is attributed to Cam : And on that account Foffius conjec1:ures K'of.de jd^I.Li. that the memory of CVi;? swife was preferved under Fejf a.hoth (' n- becaufe (lie was the daughter of Saturn^ i.e. of Adam^':xn6. that fhe is iaid ^f cik^v KArctau^jm kv^iiVyto find out fir fir the way cfi butldifig boufes. That 'Tuhal-Cain gave firft occafion to the name and worfliip of Vulcan, hath been very probably con- ceived, both from the very great affinity of the names, and of that part of Scrlptwe-hifiory which. preceedcd the Flood, i,.:;, -.^ SeU. 8. '. The memory of the Deluge it ielf we . fcave: already found to be preferved in tht Heathen Mythology, we come therefore to Noah and his polierity. Many parcels of Noah''s memory were preferved in the fcattered fragments of many Fables, un- Phaleg.li.c.i.diZV,. Saturn^ Janm, Trcmetheus, and Bacchus, Bcchartus infifts on no fewer than 14 Parallels between Noah and the Heathen. Saturp^ , which he faith are fo plain, that there is no doubt but linger Saturny Noah was underftood in the Hea- then Mythology, Saturn was faid to be the common Pa- rent of Mankind, fo was Noah ; Saturn was a juft ILmg^No'ah not only ri^Z^^eo^/^j himfelf, but a Preacher of rightcoufnels; The golden Age of Saturn was between, Nb<«^ and the difper- Oon pf Nations, In Noah''i time all manynd hadr but one Lan- guage,.\N\\\Qh tbc Heathens ■tuttndi.mdi^v 'Saturn, both; tQ,nien and bcafts ; The plantation of i^/;/fj attributed to Saturn, by the Heathens, as to M^/) by the Scrip ur es : ThzJ^dW of Saturn mentioned Cii^p-5'- '^^^ Divine Authority of the Scriptures aff'erted, jfx mentioned by the Foets, that none (hould fee the nakednefs of the Gods without fumjhment ^ feems to refpedt the facf and curfe of Cham^ in reference to Noah, Saturn and Rhea^ and thole with them are faid to be born of Thetjs , or the Ocean , which plainly alludes to Noah and his companies eicaping the Flood \ thence a Ship was the fymhol of Saturn ; and that Sa- t«rw devoured all his children^ feems to be nothing elfe but the defiruBion of the old world by Noah's flood. And not only un- der Saturn, but under Vromethem too, was Noah^s memory prefer ved. Diodorm fpeaks of the gv^^t flood under Prometheus \ BihUoth. 1. 1. and Tromethem implies one that hath forecaft and -wtfdom , fiich as Noah had, whereby he foretold the flcud^ and was" fa- ved in it , when others were Efimethems , that had not wit to prevent their own deftrudion. And no wonder if Prometheus were Noah, that the forming mankind was attributed to him, when the world was peopled v from him. Herodotm his faying that Jfia was Promethem his 'ivife, might relate to the Countrey Noah lived in, and our pro- pagation from thence. Another part of NoaU% memory was preferved under Janus ; the name of Janm is moft probably derived from (V, becaufe of Noah\ planting a Vine, and Ja- mis was called Confivim , faith Maaohius , a conferendo', hoc y. Mayer. Phi^ ^| efi, a propagine generis humani , c^u^ J ana autore conferitur *, ^^^- A^^- f- ^' now to whom can this be fo properly applied as to Noah from ^' ^' whom mankind was propagated ? and Janus his being hi- frons or looking w^s^^ ^ OTno^y forward and backward, is not fo fit an emblem of any thing as of Noah's feeing thofe two ages before and after the flood. And it is further obfervable which Plutarch fpeaks of in his Roman cjuefiions , that .the ancient coins had on one fide the image of Janus with his two faces, on the other tao/» 'tt^vi^vclv m Tf^^y.v e>?«;;t:«^-5//4J^, the fore or hinder part ofthejhip, by which the memory of the Ark of Noah feems to have been preferved. Thus we fee what Analogy there is in the flory of Janus with that of Noah ; not that I give credit to thofe /^o/er/ej which tell us oiNoah\ coming from Palaftine with his fon Japhet into Italy and plan- ting Colonies there, for which we are beholding to the fpuri- ous Ethrufcan Antiquities ; but all that I affert is, that the flory of Noah might be preferved in the eldelt Colonies^ though difguiled under other names^ as here in the cafe of Janusi Bbbb And JJ4 Origtfies Sacra : Book IJI. And on the fame account that the name of Janus is attribu- ted to Noah^ fome likewile believe him to have been the moft Bihiioth. ancient B^cc^w/, who was according to/) /W(?r«j suf«7«f ^^ dfJL- mKM, the fir fl planter of Vines and mfiru^er of men in making Wines ; and befides, Bacchus his being twice bom feems only an adumbration of Noah's prefervation after the flood, which might be accounted a fecond nativitj when the reft of the world was deftroyed ; and withall Philoflratus in the life oi AfoUoni- Philop. c. 4. us relates that the ancient Indian Bacchus came thither out of AJJyria, which yet more fully agrees with Noah. So that from thefe fcattered members of Hiffolytus and thefe broken fragme77ts of traditions^ we may gather almoft an entire hifto- ry of all the paffages concerning Noah, SiB, 9. As the ftory of Saturn and Noah do much agree, {b the three fons of Noah and thofe of Saturn^ Jupiter^ Neptune, and Fluto have their peculiar refemblances to each other. Of which Fof. de Idol. VoJJius and BochartHs have largely fpoken, and we have tou- fi/i p/ /V ^^^^ ^" already. Befides which this latter Author hath car- /.i. c.i. taf'i. ^^^^ ^^^^ parallel lower, and finds Canaan the Ion of Cham^tht fame with Mercury the fon of Jupiter ; as it was the curfe of Canaan to be a fervant of fer^vants, fb Mercury is always de- fcribed under fervile employments -, his wings feem to be the fhips of the Fhcenicians who were derived from Canaan, and his being the God of trade , noting the great Merchandize of the Phoenicians , and Mercurfs thievery noting the Vyra^ ties , or at leaft the fubtilty and craft of the Phoenicians ; he was the Father of eloquence and Afironomy, as letters and A^ ftronomy came from the Fhcenicians into Greece, The fame Author parallels Nimrod and Bacchus, and Mag;og and Pro- metheus together. The name of Bacchus is but a light variati- on of IZ;1D "13, Bar-chus , as Nimrcd was the fon of Chus , and Bacchus is called Nebrodes by the Greeks, which is the ve- ry name of Nimrod nmong them> and Bacchus is called Zayfiv^^ which excellently interprets Nimrod's being a mighty hunter, Bacchus his expeditions into Jw^i/i; were the attempts of iV/w- Deldol.l.i. rod and the Ajjynan Emperors. On which account VoJ/ius »• ^^' makes Nimrod or ^^/«j the moft ancient Mars ; for Hefiiaus Mtlejius fpeaks of Enyaltus which is A/^r/ , his being in Sen- vaar of Babylonia. That the memory of Magog was preferved under Prometheus^ thefe things make it probable, that Magog was chap. 5*. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures averted, 5 5' 5' *vas the fon of Jafhet^ as Vrometheus of lapctus, and that the pofterity of Magog was placed about Caucafusy where Prome- thetts is feigned to lie: and the eatwgof Promet^heushis heart, is only an interpretation of ;;q which applied to the heart fig- nifies to wafie away and he confumed. Thus far Bochartus* The Phoenician antiquities feem to have preferved the me- mory of Abraham^ Jacrificing his fbn Ifaac , by that place which Eufehlus produceth out of Porphjrie's book concerning the Jews ; where he relates, how Saturn whom the Phoenici- - ans call Ilrael, when he reigned in thofe parts^ and had an only fon called Jtoud^ of a nymph called Anobret, being under feme ^. ScaUger.mt, great calamity^ did facrifice that fon of his being cloathed with '^^ />*• -G^- a royal habit. Here we have a royal perfon called Ifrael ; and that Abraham (hould be accounted a Kmo- in thofe elder times, is nothing ftrange. confidering his wealth, and what petty roy- alties there were in thofe times. But Grotws, and from him c-rot. /?; Deut. Vojfius^ do not think that Abraham was here called Ifrael^ but c. 1%. v. 10. that the tranfcriber of Eufbius meeting withTA fuppofed it to ^°^- ^^ ^'^^^' be a contraction of \ac^})h^ and fo writ it at length, it muft be " '' '^' ^ ' acknowledged that Ta is ufed in the Phxmctan Theology for 5^- tum^ but yet the circumftances of the ftory make the ordina- ry reading not improbable ; neither is it ftrange, that Axbra- ham (hould be called by the name of the People which he was the Progenitor of. That l[aac fhould be meant by his only fon called Jeoud is moft likely ; for when God bids Aj.br aham go facrifice him, he faith, iake thy {on '^T\'^ thy onely fon ; Gen. 22. i. Jehid is the fame with the Phoenician Jeoud, That Sara is meant by Anobret^ the original of the name implies, which is as Bochartus derives it nn^iy Jn, Anmheref^ that is, ex gra- tia concipiens, which the Apofile explains. Through faith Sara De Pha'nic. col. her felf received ftrength toconcei've feed. Now all the dif- /• "2. ^- 2. ferenceis, that which was only defigned and intended by y^- ^^^- ^^' "• hraham^ was believed by the Phoemctans as really done, that it might be as z. precedent to them for their Av^^a'Tro^sicu, facri- ficing of men, a thing fo miich in ufe among the Fhoenictans^ and all the Colonies derived from them, as many learned men • have at large (hewed. But belidesthis , there are particular teftimonies concerning Abr^har/t^ his age, wifdom and know- ledge, his coming out of Chaldaa ^ an-^ the propagation of knowledge from him among the Cbaldaansj Phoenicians^ and B b b b 2 ty£g)pti' 55"^ Origines Sacra : ^ Book III. jofeph. Antiq. zy^gyptiavs, are extant out of Berofus, Eupolewus, and others i. I. c. 7. in Jofefhus and Eufebhts, and from thence tranfcribed by ma- Euje . Prap. E' leaded men , which on that account 1 forbear tranfcri- Ding, as being common and obvious. SeB 10. Some have not improbably conjectured, that the memory oi Jacob s long peregrination, and fervice with his Uncle La- han^ was preferved under the ftory of AfoUo his banifliment Callimach. and being d. Shepherd xxnd^r Admet us. ¥ov Cailimachus va- Hymn. m A- ^^^^^ ^j^g|. j^^^^ ^^^g ^^ ^^^^^ q£ Jpolio's travails, as it was of ^^ ^' Jacob^s^ and withall mentions a ftrange increafe of Cattel un- der Apollo s care, anfwerablc to what the Scripture reports concerning Jacob, But it is more certain, that the memory G^n, 1^. 18. of Jacobs fetting up the fione he had refted on for a pillar ^ and pouring ofi upon it, and calling the place Bethel^ was pre- g"^^' rV^"^^' ^^^^^^^ under the anointed fiones which the Fhcenicians from Csn i\ Ti ^^^^^^ called baitukia, as hath been frequently obferved by SsU. de Diis learned men, from whence came the cuftom of anointing ft ones Syrts. amiong the Heathens^ of which fo very many have largely K Heinf.^ in difcourfed. Thence the Proverb af a fuperftitious man , St^n '^^ ttcIvIa Ki^v hiTAesvsrocrwvf^, "^hich. Armbius Qzlh lubrkatum Cafaubon. ad ^^ip^dem '^ ex oUv't unguine fordidatum. It feems the anointing Theoph. p.^29s. the ftoncs with oyl, was then the fymbol of the confecratiort Herald, ad Ar- of them. The name BfitiW©- for fuch a ftone occurrs in He- ^ci ■ ' d fy^^^^^-> ^^^ Greek Etymologift^ Damafcius in Photius^ and 0- apuL Florid, thcrs. That the memory of Jofeph in ^^gypt was prelerved Quzd. & El. under the ^y£gyptian Apts, hath been fliewed with a great deal Tnsnborfi ad of probability by the learned Vojfius^ in his often cited piece of Minuc deido- /Jr//Wr/, from the teftiiiionies ol Julius Maternus ^ Rufinus^ A. c.i^. 3j^(j 5^.^^ . and from thefe three arguments, i. The great- nefs of the benefit which xht zAE^gyptians received by Jofeph ^ which was of that nature that it could not eafily be forgot ,, and that no fymbol was fo proper tO' fct it out as the ^^gy- pian Apu ; becaufe the farm7ie was portended by lean Kine, and the plenty by fat ; and Mmucms at Rome , for relieving the People in a time o^ famine., had a ftatue of a golden BhU ere^fted to his memory. 2. The tAigyptians were not back- ward to teftifie their r^fpeiH: to Jofeph^ as appears by Phara- oh's rewarding him ; now it was the cuftom of the Egyptians to preferve the memories of their great Benefa(flors by fome fymboUio poftmiy y which were at firft intended only for a civil Chap, f, T^^^ Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted, ^^j civil ufe, although they were after abufed to Superfiirion and Idolatry, ;. From the names of yjp^ and Serapis. Apis he conceives to be the facred name of Jofeph amon^g the Egy- ptians^ and is as much as 3S; Father ; lb Jofeph himfelf faith, Gen. 45. ^. he was as a Father to Fharaoh. And Seraphs, as Rufinm and Suidas both tell us, had a huf,nl upon his head^ and Serapis is probably derived from "lliz;, Sor^ which fignifies a Bull^ and Apis. So that by this means the ftory of Jofeph is attefted by the ^yEgyptians fuperfiitwns^ of which- they can give no ac- count fo likely as this is. Many things concerning Mofes are prefer ved in the ftory of Se^, tu Bacchm, not that from thence we are to concluded that Mo- fes was the Bacchus of the Greeks^ as Vajjias thinks, but they took Icveral parts of the Eafiem traditions concerning him , which they might have from the Phoenicians who came with Cadmus into Greece ^ while the memory o^ Mo fes was yet frefh among the Canaanites. In the ftory of Bacchus^ as- Voffius ob- De IM. L u ierves, it is exprefly faid, that he was born in ^Algypty and that ^- i^ ibon after his birth he was put in an Ark^ and expofed to the River, which tradition was prefer ved among the Brafiata of Laconica : and Bacchus in Orpheus is called M(^?, and by Plu- tarch de Ifide d^ Ofiride, Palafiinus : and he is called 0iiua7u>^ which agrees to Mofes^ who, befides his own Mother, was a- dopted by Pharaoh'?, daughter : Bacchus was likewife commen- ded for his beauty as Mofes v/as , and was faid to be educated; in a Mount of Arabia called Nyfa , which agrees with Mofes his relidence in Arabia forty years ; fo Plutarch mentions tpvy^i A/o;/uV» the baniJkMents of Bacchns^ and Nonnus menti- ^/^^. /; 20.. ens Bacchus his flight into the Red-fea : who likewife menti- ons his. battles in Arabia and with the neighbouring Princes there. Diodorus faith, that Bacchus his Army had not only men but women in it ; which is moft true of \h.^ company which ^ij^i ^^ .. Mofes led. Orpheus calls Bacchus ^^juo^o^v, and attributes to him J)'TkctKcL 3? ^l to know than God himfelf ? or what more glorious and ex- ceUent objeB coqld he difcover than himfelf to the world ? There is nothing cei:tainly which fliould more, commend the C c c c 2 Scri' r^4 Origtnes Sacra: : Book III. Scriptures to us, than that thereby we may grow more ac- quainted with God ; that we may know more of his nature^ and all his ferfeBionsy and many of the great reafcns of his adlings in the world. We may by them underftand with fafety what the eternal purpcfes of God were as to the waj ^ of mans recovery by the death of his Son ; we. may there fee and underftand the great yvifdcm of God •, not only in the contrivance of the -worlds and ordering of it, but in the gra- dual revelations of himfelf to his people, by what fleps he trained up his Church till the fulhefs of time was come ; what his aim was in laying fuch a load of Ceremonies on his people of the Jews ; by what/^pi and degrees he made way for the full revelation of his Will to the World by fpeaking in thtfe lafi days by his Son, after he had fpoke at [undry times and divers manntrs by the Prophets, &C. unto the Fathers, In the Scriptures we read the moft rich and admirable difco- ^eries of Divine goodnefs, and all the ways and methods he ufeth in alluring Tinners to himfelf, with what Majefiy he cow- mandsy with what ccndefcention he intreats^ with what im- fcrtunity he wooes men's fouls to be reconciled to him, with wiiat favour he embracethy with what tendemefs he cha/li^ feth , with what bowels he pitieth thofe who have chofen him to be their God ! With what power he fupportetb, with what wifdom he direBethy with what cordials he refrefhath the fouls of fuch who are dejeBed under the fenfe of his difplea- flire, and yet their love is Jincere towards him ! With what profound humility, what holy holdnefs, what becoming di- fiance, and yet what ^jrefilefs importunity do we therein find the fouls of God's people addrefling themfelves to him in frayer ! With what cheerfulnefs do they ferve him, with what confidence diOthQ'j trufi him, with what refolution do they adhere to him in a\[ freights and difficulties, with what patience do they fubmit to his PVill in their greateft extremi- ties! H.OW far ful are they of finning againfi: God, how careful to pleafe him , how regardlefs of fuffering , when they muft choofe either that or finning, how little a ppre hen- five of mens difpleafure , while they enjoy the favour of God ! Now all thefc things which are fo fully and pathetical- ly cxpreiTed in Scripture , - do abundantly fet forth to us the. Chap. 6. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures afferted, j 6^ the exuberancy asd Vleonafm of God's grace and goodnefs to- wards his people, which makes them delight fo much in him, and be fb fenfible of his difpleafure. But above all other difcoveries of God's goodnejs^ his .fending his Son into the vjorld to die {ov Jinnersy is that which thQ Scripture fets forth with the greateft Life and Elccjuence. By Eloquence, I *mean not an artificial compofure of words, but the gr acuity ^ -weighty and ferfwafivenefs of the matter contained in them. And what can tend more to melt our froz^en hearts into a current of thankful obedience to God, than the vigorous refteUion of the beams of God s lo^e through Jefm Chrift up- on US ! Was there ever fo great an expreffion of Lo-ve heard of! nay, was it pofTible to be imagined, that that God who perfedlly hates /?«, Ihould hlmfelf offer the pardon of it, and lend his Son into the 72Jorld to fecure it to the finner, who doth fo heartily repent of his//2x, as to deny himfelf, and take up his crofs and follow Chrifi ! Well mJght the Apoftle lay, Ti)h is a faithful faying^ and Tvorthy of all acceptation^ i Tim i ic- that Je(zts Chrif came into the world to fave finner s. How dry and faplefs are all the voluminous difcourfes of Thtlofc- fhers^ compared with this Sentence ! How jejune and unfa- tisfa^ory are all the difcoveries they had DfGod and his good- nefs, in comparifon of what we have by the Gofpel of Chrijl I Well might Paul then fay. That he determined to know no- j (^^j. .. ^ thing hut Chrif and him crucified, Chrifi crucified is the Library which triumphant fiouls will be ftudfi^tg in to all Eternity, This is the only Library which is the true ia,T§HQv 4^X^if that which cures the foul of all its maladies and di- * ftempers ; other knowledge makes mens minds giddy and fla- tulent ; this fettles and compofes them ; other knowledge is apt to fwell men into high conceits and opinions of them- ! fefves ; this brings them to the trued view of themfelves, i and thereby to humility and fobriety ; Other knowledge ^ j leaves mens hearts as it found them ^ this alters' th^m and i makes them better. So tranfcendent an excellency is there in J the knowledge of Chrifi crucified above the fublimcft fpecU' " lations in the world. And is not this an inedimable benefit we enjoy by the . SeB. 5. Script ure^ that therein we can read and converie with all • thefe ^66 Origines Sacm : Book III. thcTe expreffions of God's Icve and goeJnefs, and that in his own language ? Shall we admire and praifb what we meet with in Heathen Thilojofhers, which is generous and hand- fome 5 and (liall we not adore the infinite fulmfs of the Scriptures, which run over with continued expreJJIcns of that and a higher nature ? What/c//; is it to magnifie thofe leafj kine, the notions of Pbilojcfhers, and to contemn th^ fat^ the ple77tjf and fulnefs of the Scriptures ? If there be not far more 'valuable dndi excellent difcoverks o^Xh^ Divine Nature and Perfe^ions ; if there be not far more excellent dinBions ^ndrules of praBice in the facred Scriptures, than in the fuhlimefi of all the Philofophers, then let us leave our full ears, and feed upon the thin. But certainly no foher and rational J}>trtt that puts any value upon the knowledge of God^ but on the fame account that he doth prize the difcourfes of any Phdojcphers concerning God, he cannot but fet a value of a far higher nature on the word of God. And as th^ good- nefs of Gcd is thus dilcovered in Scripture, fo is his Juftice and Holinefs : we have therein recorded the moft remiirk- able judgments of God upon contumacious finners, the feve- refl: denunciations of d. judgment to c^«?e againft all that live in fin, theexadeft precepts oi holinefs in the world; and what can be dcfired more to difcover the Holinefs of God, than we find in Scripture concerning him ? If therefore acquain- tance with the nature, perfeBions, defigns of fb excellent a Be^ wz as God is, be a thins defirable to humane nature, w^e have the greateft cauie lo^dxmxf&itexcdUncy and adore thQ fulnefs of the Scriptures vjhkh give US fo large, rational, and com- pleat account of the Being and Attributes of God. And which tends yet more to commend the Scriptures to us, thofe things which the Scripture doth moft fully difcoyer concerning G@d , do not at all contradict thofe prime and common notions which are in our natures concerning him, but do exceedingly advance and improve them, and tend the moft to regulate our conceptions and apprehenjicns of God, that we may not mifcarry therein, as othervvile men are apt to do. For it being natural to men fo far to love themjel'ves, as to fet the greateft value upon thofe ex^ cellencies which they think themfelves molt maft.rs of; thence chap. (5. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures aJferteJ, ^Cj thence men came to be exceedingly miftaken in their appre- henfions of a Deity ^ fome attributing one thing as a prfe- tVton^ another a different thing, according to their humours and inclinations. Thus imperious felf- willed men are apt to cry up God's abfolute power and dominion as his greateft prfeBio?i ; eafie and foft-fpirited men his patience and ^ood- nefs ; fevere and rigid men his jnjlice and feverity : every one according to his humour and temper ^ making his God of his own complexion : and not only fo, but in things re- mote enough from being perfe^ions at all ; yet becaufe they arefuch things as they prize and value, they fuppole of ne- ceffity they muft be in God, as is evident in the Epicurea7Js tt-m^iA, by which they excluded pro^idence^ as hath been already obferved. And withall confidering how very diffi- cult it is for one who really believes that God is of a pure^ jufi-y and holy nature, and that he hath grievoufly offended him by his fins, to believe that this God will pardon him upon true repentance : It is thence neceffary that God (hould make known himfelf to the world , to prevent our mifcon- ceptions of his nature , and to aflure a fufpiciom , becaule guilty creature^ how ready he is to pardon inimity, tranf- greffiony and Jln^ to fuch as unfeignedly repent of their fol- lies, and return unto himfelf. Though the light of nature may dictate much to us of the benignity and goodnefs of the Divine Nature, yet it is hard to conceive that that Ihould difcovcr further than God's general goodnefs to fuch as pleafe him : but no foundation can be gathered thence oi his readmefs to pardon offenders, w^iich being an adl of grace, muft alone be difcovered by his PVill. I cannot think the Sun, Moon^ and Stars are fuch itineram Preachers, as to unfold unto. us the whole Counfel and Will of God in refe- rence to man's acceptance with God upon repentance. It is not every Star in thQ firmament can do that which the Star once did to the wife men^ lead them unto Chrifi. The Sun- in the Heavens is no Parelius to the Sun of right eouftefs. The bed Afironomer will never find the day- far from on high in the reft of his number. What St. Auflin faid of TuUfs worksy is true of the whole Volume of the Creation, There are admirable things to be found in them : but the name of Chrfv 5-^8 Orighes Sacra j Book III. Chi-ijI- is not legible there. The -work of Redemption is not engraven en the v^^orks of providence; if it had, a particular divine revelation had been unnec^flary, and the Apo(rles were lent on a needlefs eirand, which the world had underfiood without their Preachings viz,. That God was in Chrjfi recon* ^ Cor. f, jS ciii'^'g thetiwrld unto himjelf^ not imputing to men their trefpaf- ip. ■' fes^ and hath committed to them the Minijhy of Reconciliation How was the 7/^ori of reconctliation committed to them/ if it were common to them with the whole frame of the world? and the Apoftles ^are elfe where might have been eafily an- Rom. le. J., fwered, How can mm hear without a Treacher ? For then - they might have known the 7vay of fahation^ without any fpecial mejjengers fent to deliver it to them. I grant that God's Icng-fuff'ering and fatience is intended to lead men to re- pentance^ and that fbme general ccUeBions might be made from providence of the placability of God's nature^ and that God never left him f elf without a witnefs of his goodnefs in Aft. 14. 14. the world, being kind to the unthankful^ and doing good^ in Luk.5. 35;, 35.^/x;/;2^ rain and fruitful feafons. But though thefe things might fufficiently difcover to fuch who were apprehenfivc of ^ the guilt of fin, that God did not a6t according to his grea- tQ^feverity^ and thereby did give men encouragement to hear- ken out and enquire after the true way of being reconciled to God ; yet all this amounts not to ^firm foundation for fait& as to the remijfion oijin, which doth fuppofe God himlelf pub- lifliing an adt of grace and indempnity to the world, wherein he allures the pardon of fin to fuch as truly repent and un- feignedly believe his holy Gojpel. Now is not this an inefti- mable advantage we enjoy by the Scriptures, that therein we underlland what God himfelf hath difcovered of his own na- ture and per feB ions y and of his readinefs to pardon fin upon thofe gracious terms of Faith and Repentance, and that which neceflarily follows from thele two, hearty and fincne obedience ? * c ft /: ^' The Scriptures give the mofi faithful repre'entat'ion of the ft ate and condition of the foul of man. The world VvUS almoft loft in Difputes concerning the nature^conditicv^^v^imrnh'^taUty of the foul before divine revelation was m-^'^ ' -own to man- kind by the Gofpel of Cl^ifi; ; but / ' ' in^.^'ior-altty was brought to light by the Gojpel y a.- i l.\ future ftate of Chap.^. The Divine Authority of theScriptures ajferted, 5 6^ of the foul of man , not difcovcred in an uncertain V latent- calvid.'j, but with the greateft light and evidence fnom that God who hath the fupreme difpofal oi fouls , and therefore beft knows and underftands them. The Scriptures plainly and fully reveal d. judgment to come, in which God will judge thefecrets of all hearts^ when every one muf give <^n account of him [elf unto God^ and God will call men to give an account of their Jlewardjljip here, of all the receipts they have had from him , and the cxpences they have been at, and the tm- ^rovements they have made of the talents he put into their hands. So that the Gofpel of Chnjf is the fuilell wfirument of df cover y of the certainty of the future ftate of the foul^ and the conditions which abide it , upon its being didodged from the body. But this is not all which the Scripture dif- covers as to the jlaie of the /o/// ; for it is not only a projpt- Bive-glaf, reaching to its future (late^ but it is the moft faithfull lookmg-glaf^ to difcover ail the ^cts and deformities of th^ foul : And not only (hews where they are^ but whence they came, what their nature is, and whither they tend. The true Original of all that dfordtr and dfcompofure which is in the joul of man, is only fully and fatisfavftorily given us in the Word of God , as hath been already proved. The nature and working of this corruption in man , had never been fo clearly manifefted , had not the Law and Will of God been difcovered to the World ^ that is the glaS whereby we fee the fecret workuigs of thofe Bees in our hearts, the corrupti- ons of our natures ; that fets forth the folly of our imagina- tions , the unrulinej^ of our pa/jhns , the dijiempers of our 'wills , and the abundant deceit fulnefi of our hearts. And it is hard for the mod Elephantine finmr ( one of the great- eft magnitude ) fo to trouble thele watns , as not therein to dilcover the greatnefs of his own deformities. But that which tends mod to awaken the drowfie , fenfelefi Ipir.ts of men, the Scripture doth moft fully defcribe the tendency of corruption , that the wages of fin is death , and the illue of continuance in fin will be the everlafting mifery of the fod^ in a perpetual {eparatim from the prefence of God , and un- dergoing the ladies and fever ities of conjcience to all eternity. What a great difcovery is this of the fatthfulnef of God to D d d d the Yya Origines Sacral : Book III. the World, that he fufFers not men to uvJoe themfelves with- out letting them know of it before-hand , that they might a- void it ! God feeks not to ejttrap men-s Souls , nor doth he rejoyce in the mifery and mine of his creatures ^ but fully de- clares to them what the ccnfecfuenca and ijjue of their finfull practices will be , alfures them of a judgment to come, de- clares his own future fcventy againft contumacious finners, that they might not think themfelves furprized , and that if they had known there had been fo great davger in Jin ^ they would never have been fuch/co/i, as for the fake of it to run into eternal mifery. Now God , to prevent this , with the greateit pUmnefi and fakhfulnej^ hath (hewed men the nature and danger of all their fins , and asks them beforehand what they will doe in the end thereof; whether they are able to bear his ivrath^ and wrefile with everlafimg hur?7mgs ? if not, he bids them bethink themfelves of what they have'done al- ready, and repent^ and amend t\\€\v li^ues , left iniquity prove their rmne ^ and definition overtake them, and that without remedy. Now if men have caufe to priz^e and value a faithfull Mofinor, one that tenders their good, and would prevent their ruine, we have caufe exceedingly to prize and value the Scri- ptures, which givQ us the trueft reprefentation of thQ fiate and condition of our fouls. 5. The Scripture difcovers to tts the only way of f leafing God^ and enjoying his favour. That clearly reveals the way ( which man might have fought for to all eternity without particular revelation ) whereby fins may be pardoned , and whatever we doe may be acceptable unto God. It (hews us that the ground of our acceptance with God , is through Chrt(l, whom he hath made a propitiation for the fins of the 7vorld, and who alone is the true and living way ^ whereby we may. draw near to God with a trtle hearty in full ajfurance of faith ^ having our hearts Jfri?ihled from an evil conjcience. Through Chrift we underftand the terms on which God will fliew fav ur and grace to the World, and by him we have ground of a Trappi^net , accefi with freedom and boldnefi unto God. On his account we may hope not only for grace to fubdue our fins, refift temptations, conquer the devil and the world ; but having fought this good fight and finified our courfc, by <• Chap.<5. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures afferteJ, $7^ hy fatient continuance in well-doing , we may juftly look for «» glory ^ honour^ and immortality^ and that crown of righreouf- nef which is laid up for tbofe who wait in faith, holinels, and humility, for the appearance of Chrifi from heaven. Now what things can there be of greater moment and importance for men to kn^w^ or God to reveal, than the nature of God ^ and OUT fehes, thQfl-ate and condition of our fouls^ the only way to avoid eternal mifery^ and enjoy everlafting hlif. The Scriptures dilcover not only matters of importance , ScB, 7, but of the greateft depth and myfierioufnej^. There are ma- 2. ny wonderfull things in the Law of God , things we may ad^ mire^ but are never able to comprehend. Such are the eter- nal purposes and decrees of God ^ the doBrtne of the 'trinity ^ the Incarnation of the Son of God ^ and the manner of the ope- ration of the Spirit of God on the fouls of men , which arc all things of great weight and moment for us to underftand and believe that they are , and yet may be unftarchahle to „ our reafon , as to the particular manner of them. What certain ground our faith ftands on as to thefe things hath • been already ffiewed , and therefore I forbear infifting on Book 2. ch. 8. them. ^^^- ^^ ^» 7. The Scripture comprehends matters of the moft univerfal ^. fatisfaBion to the minds of men ; though many things do much exceed our apprehenfeons , yet others are moft fuitable to the ditlates of our nature. As Origen bid Celfm fee , «} C. Celf. lih. i, ft« 7W ^ m^coi v\(juav r KoivcCii ovvoicu^ af^^v o-ctVA^^zvoyja., ^- ^* ^3 J* TttTiS^iTT T«< ci^yvoy/oveo^ eliiiiovla,^ 'T^-^ Kiy>i^a>v , whether it was not the agree ablenep of the principles of faith with the common notions of humane nature , which prevailed mafi upon all can- did and ingenuous auditors of them. And therefore as Socra- tes faid of Her adit us his Books, What he underftood was ex- cellent., and therefore he fuppofed that which he did not un- derftand was fo too : fo ought we to fay of the Scriptures , If thole things w^hich are within our capacity be fo fuitable to our natures and reafons., thole Cannot contradict our rea- fon which yet are above them. There are many things which the minds of men were fufficicntly afjured that they were , yet were to feek for fattsfaciion concerning them, which they could never have had without Divine Revelation. As D d d d 2 the crj%, O^ghes Sacr^ : Book IJL the nature oUrue happmf, wherein it lay, and how to be ob- tained, which the Fhilcfopherj were fo puzled with, the Scri- pure gives us full fatisfa61ion concerning it. True contentment ^ under the troubles of life, which the Scripture only acquaints us with the true grounds of; and all the prefcriptions of Hea- then Moral ifis fall as much Ihort of, as the dir^^lions of aa Er/7pirick doth of a wife and skilfull Vhyfic'ian. Avoiding the fears of death , which can alone be through a grounded ex- pedation of a future /jfe of happinef which death leads men to, which cannot be had but through the right underftanding of the li/ord of God. Thus we fee the excellency of the w^r- ters themfelves contained in this reveUtton of the trwd of God to the world. SicB, 8. As the matters themfelves are of an excellent nature ^ fb is a. the manner wherein they are revealed in the Scriptures , and that, • I, In a clear and perj^icuotts manner \ not but there may . • be ftill fome palTages which are hard to be underftood , as be^ * ing either prophetical or confifting of awhiguom phrafes^ or con- * taining matters above our ccmprehenfion ; but all thole things * which concern the ttrms of man's falvation are delivered with the greateft evidence and perfpicuity. Who cannot un- derhand what thefe things mean, What doth the Lord require ofihee^ hut to doe iufily.^ and to love mercy ^ and tc 'ivalk hum^ hly v^iijj thy God? that without faith it u impojjible to pleafe God ; that without holmef none jhall fee the Lord ; that unleft. we he horn again , we can never enter into the Kingdom of Heaven ; thcfe and fuch like things are fo plain and clear , , that it is nothing but men's fliutting their eyes againft the light can keep them from underftanding them ; God intended Ih-efe things as direciions to men ; and is not he able to fpeak intelligihly when he pleafe ? he that made the tongue^ fliall he not^eak fo as to beunderftood without aa infallible Interpre- ter ? efpecially when it is his defign to make known to men the terms of Xhzw eternal happinejs. Will Go^ jl^dge men at \ the great day for not believing thole things which they could not underftand f Strange^ that ever men fhould judge the Scriptures ohfcure in matters necejjary, when the Scripture ac- counts it fo great a judgment for men not to /Wer/^w^ them.* -w Chap. 6, The Divine Authority of the Scriptures afferted, * 5 73 If cur Gojhel he hid , it is hid to them that are lofi \ In whom 2 Cor. 4. 3^,- the god of this world hath hltnded the mlndr cf them which he- lieve not, lefl the ll^ht of the gloriota Gojpel of Chrijf [Ijould jlnne unto them. Sure Lot'% dooi; was vfihfe enough^ if it were a judgment for the men of Scdom not to fee it ; and the Scriptures then are flain and inteihgjhk enough , if it be {q great ?i judgment not to underftand niem. 2. In a powerfull and authoritative manner \ as the things contained in Scripture do not fo much beg acceptance as com- mand it ; in that the exmjfcns wherein our duty is con- cerned are fuch as awe men's corfciences and pierce to their hearts and -to their y^rref thoughts \ All things are open and na- Heb. 4. m^^i^^ ked before this^U^ord of God) every jecret of the mind and thought of the heart lies open to its fircke and free ; it is (juick and powerfull ^ fij.irper than a tvjo-edged fword^ pier- cing to the dividing afunder of foul and J^tritj and ofthejoynts and marrow^ and is a dtfcerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. The Word is a felefcope to difcover the great ^ • Luminaries of the world, the Truths of higheft concernment • to thQ fouls of men^ and it is fuch a Microjcope as difcovers to • • * us the fmalleft Jto?n of our thoughts^ and difcerns the mod ie- cret intent of the heart, ilnd, as far as this light reacheth, it comes with power and authority , as it comes armed with the Majefiy of that God who reveals it, whofe authority extends over thQ foul and confcience of man in its moft fecret'and hid-' den rece&Si ^. In a pure and unmixed manner ; in all other writings how^ good fbever , we have a great mixture of drof and gold together ; here is nothing but pure gold, diamonds without flaws , Suns without fpcts. The moft current coins of the world have their alloy es of bafer mnals , there is no fuch mixture in divine Truths ; as they all come from the fame- Author, fo they all have the fame purity. There is a Urim and Thummim upon the whole Scripture , light and perfection in every part of it. In the Vhilofophers we may meet , it may be , with fome fcattered fragments of purer metal , amidft abundance of drof and impure oar ; here we have whole wedges of ^old ^ the fame vein of purity and holme f running, through the whole Book of Scriptures. Hence it is called the ^ form'' % 5*74* Origines Sacns : Book III, a Tim. 1. 1 v/^'*^ of found words ; here have been no huckfiers to corrupt and mix their own innjentions with Divine Truths. Se5l Q. 4- ^^ ^^ uniform and agreeMe manner. This I grant iS not fufficJent of it felf to prove the Scriptures to be Divine becaufe all men do not contradi(ft themfeh'es in their -writing-!^ but yet there are fome peculiar circumflances to be confidered in the agreeablenefs of the parts of Scripture to each other W'hich are not to be found in mere humane -ivntings. i. That this do^irine was delivered by perfons who lived in diffe- rent ages and times from each^ other. Ufually one ag-e cor- reds anothers faults , and we are apt to pity the io-norance of our predecefbrs , when it may be our pofierity may think us as ignorant as we doe them. But in the facixd Scripture we read not one age condemning another j we find light ftill increafing in the (eries of times in Scripture , but no refleBi- ens in any time upon the ignorance^ or weaknef, of the prece- dent ; the dimmed light was fufficient for its age^ and was a Qjrintil. lih. I. ftep to fuither difcovery. ^Hmilian gives it as the reafon of cap. 6^ ^-jig great uncertainty of Grammar rules, c^uia non analogia di- > • mifj'a coelo formam locjuendi dedit ; that which he wanted as to Grammar J we have as to Divine Truths ; they are delivered from heaven^ and therefore are always unifor-m and agreeable to each other. 2. By perfons of different inter efis in the world. God made choice of men of all ranks to be Enditers of his Oracles, to • make it appear it was no matter of State-policy or particular interefi which was contained in his word^ which perfons of fijch different interefts , could rot have agreed in as they do. We have Mofes^ David, Solomon, perfons of royal rank and quality ; and can it be any mean thing , which thefe think it their glory to be Penners of? We have Ifaiah, Daniel, and other perfons of the higheft educaticmndaccomplijliments^ and can it be any trivial thing which thefe imploy themfelves in a We have Amos^ and other Prophets in the OldTefawent, and the Apofiles in the New , of the meaner fort of men in the world, yet all thefe joyn in confcrt together ; when God tunes t\\m jpirits, all agree in the farnQfiram of divine truths, and give light and harmony to each other. 3. By Chap. 6. the Divhe Authority of the Scriptures ajferted, 575" 3. By per fens m dtjferent places and conditions ; ibme in ^ projf'erii/ in their own Countrey , fome under baniiliment and adveriity, yet all agreeing in the fame fuhftance of dcclrme; of which no alteration we fee was made either for tht flattery of thofe in power^ or for avoiding mljeries and calamities. And under all the different d^Jpenfations before, under and af- ter the Law^ though the management 0^ things was different, yet the dodrine and chfign was for fubftance the fame in all. All the different diJ})e?ijations agree in the fame common pnn- ciples of religion ; the (ame ground of acceptayjce with God , and obligation to duty was common to all, though the peculi- ar inftances w'herein God was ferved might be different, accor- ding ro th« ages of growth in the Church of God. So that this great uniformity conlidered in thefe circumftances , is an argu- ment that thefe things came orignally from the lame Splnt^ though conveyed through different tnjhuments to the know- ledge of the world. 5. In a per fua five and convincing manner : and that thele ■'*• ways. I. Bringing divine truths down to our capacity ^ clo- thing fpiritual matter in familiar exprellions and fimilitudes, that fo they might have the eafier admiffion into our minds. 2. Propounding things as our interest which are our duty : thence God^ fo frequently in Scripture, recommends our duties to us under all thofe motives which are wont to have the great- eft force on the minds of men ; and annexeth gracious promi" fes to our performance of them ; and thofe of the moft wxighty and concerning things. Of grace^ favour^ proteFtt- on , deliverance , audience of prayers , and eternal happinef ^ and if thefe will not prevail with men , w^hat motives will ? 3. Courting us to obedience , when he might not only command tts to ohey^ hut punifi prefently for difobedience. Hence are all thole moft pathetical and ajfeBionate firains w^e read in Scri- Deut. 5. 29. pture. O that there were fuch a heart within them^ that they 'would fear me and keep all my commandments always^ that it might go well with them , and with thetr children after them. Wo unto thee , O Jerufalem , wilt thou not be made clean ? Jer. r 3. 27; when (liall it once be ? Turn ye^ turn ye from your evil way s^ Ezek. 33. iio for why will ye die^ O houfe o/Ifrael ? How ^3 all I give thee Hcf. 11. 8. tipy Ephraim ? howjhall I deliver thce^ Ifrael ? how fl) all I maki f 7 d Origtnes Sacrae : Book III fx'ake thee as Admah ? how Jlmll I fet thee as Zeboim ? TT^ine ^ heart is turned within me , wj re^entivgs are kindled together. Matt. 23.37. O Jerufalem, Jerufalein, ho-w often would I ha^ve gathered thy children together , as a hen gathereth her chickens under her f wings J and ye would not ? What JUajefiy , and yet what fweetnefa.nd coiidefcenjton is there in t\it^Q exprejjions ? What chftinacy and rebellion is it in men for them to ftand out a- gainft God^ when he thus comes down from his throne of Ma- jefiy and wooes rebel Uous//;;;2^ri to return unto him that they may be pardoned ? Such a matchlels and unparalkll d firain of Rhetorkk is there in the Scripture , far above the art and infmuations of the moft admired Orators. Thus wc fee the peculiar excellency of the manner wherein the matters con- tained in Scripture are revealed to us : thus we have corifide- red the excellency of the Scripture^ as it is a difco'very of God's tmndto the world. ■^eB. 10. The Scriptures may be confidered as a rule of life ^ or as a 2. Law of God which is given for the Government of the lives of men^ and therein the excellency of it lies in the na- ture of the dutiesy and the encouragements to the praBice of them. I. In the nature of the duties required , which are moft hecoming God to require , moft reafonable for us to perform. I. Mofi hecoming God to recjuire , as they are moft fuitable and agreeable to the Divine nature ^ the imitation of which in our ^CWOUS is the fub fiance of our Religion. Imitation of him in his goodnef and holinej^ ^ by our conftant endeavours of mortifying fin , and growing in grace and piety. In his grace and mercy , by our kindnefs to all men , forgiving the injuries men doe unto us, doing good to our greatefi enemies. In his jufiice and eejuity^ by doing as we would be done by^ and keepmg a confcience void of offence towards God and towards men. The firft takes in the duties of the firfi , the other the duties of th^ fecond Table, All aBs of piety towards God, are a part of Jufiice ; for, as Tully faith, Ms^id aliud efh pte- tasy nifi jufiitta adverfits Deos ? and fo our loving God with our whole heart s^ our entire and fincere obedience to his will, is a part of natural juftice ; for thereby we do but render unto God that which is his due from us as we are his creatures. We fee Cfiap.^. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted. j'77 fee then the whole duty of man, the fearing God and keeping hts Commandments , is as neceffary a part of Jufiice , as the rendring to every man his own is. 2. They are mod reafonahle for us to perform , in that, I. Religion is not only a fervice of the reafonahle faculties which are employed the moil: in it, the commands of the Scri" pure reaching the heart moft , and the fervice required be- ing a f^tritual fa'vice ,. not lying in meats and drinks , or any outward ohfer ovations , but in a landlified temper of heart and mind, which difcovers it felf in the courfe of a Chrifii-- ans life ; but, 2. The fer'vice it felf of Religion is reafonahle ; the commands of the Goj^J are fuch as no man's reafon "which confiders them fan doubt of the excellency of them. All natural worjhip is founded on the dictates of nature^ all i»/?/- ^«fe^ Tiforjhip on Goi'i revealed will-, and it is one of the prime dictates of nature, that God mud be univerfally obeyed. Befides, God requires nothing but What is apparently man's interefi to doe ; God prohibits nothing but what will dejlroy him if he doth it ; fb that the commands of the Scriptures arc very jufi and reafonahle, a. The encouragements are more than proportionable to the difficulty of obedience, God's commands are in themfelves eafie, and moft fuitable to our natures. What more rational for a creature than to obey his Maker ? all the difficulty of religi- on arifeth from the corruption of nature. Now God^ to en- courage men to conquer the difficulties arifing thence , hath propounded the ftrongeft motives and moft prevailing argu- ments to obedience. Such are the con f derations of God's love, and goodnefs manifefted to the world, by fending his Son into it, to dieforfinners, and to give them an example which they are to follow , and by his readinefs through him to pardon the fins , and accept the perfons of fuch who fo receive him as to walk in him 5 and by his promifes of grace to affifl them in the wrefiUng with the enemies of their falvation. And to all thefc add that glorious and unconceivable reward which God hath promifed to all thofe who fincerely obey him ; and by thefe things we fee how much the encouragements over- wergh the difficulties , and that none can make the leaft pre- tence that there is not motive fuflScient to down-weigh the E e e e troubles J78 Origines Sacne : Book IH- troubles which attend the exercife of ohedlence to the Will of God. So that we fee what a peculiar excellency there is in the Serif tures as a r«/e of /i/e, above all the Precepts of mere Mordijls^ the foundation of obedience being laid deeper in man's obligation to ferve his Maker, the praBice of obedi- ence being carried higher in thofe moft holy precepts which are in Scnptttre , the reward of obedience being incomparably greater than what men are able to conceive, much lels to pro- mife or hefiow, » SeB, II. The Excellency of the Scriptures appears , as they contain 5' in them a Covenant of Grace , or the tranfaEi^ions between God and Man^ in order to his eternal happineJS, The more memorable any tranfaBions are, the mov^ 'valuable are any authentuk records of them. The Scriptures contain in them the Magna Charta of Heaven , an AB of pardon with the Rcyal aj/ent of Heaven , a Proclamation of good-will from God towards men ; and can we then fet too great a value on that which contains all the ren"Arkable palfages between God and the fouls of men, in order to their felicity^ from the be- ginning of the world ? Can we think , fince there is a God in the world of infinite goodnejl, that he (hould fuffer all mankind to perifli inevitably without his propounding any means for efcaping of eternal mifery ? Is God fb good to men as to this prefent Itfe ; and can we think if man's Ibul be im- mortal, as we have proved it is, that he (liould wholly neg- led any offer of good to men as to their eternal -welfare ? Or is it poffible to imagine that man (hould be happy in ano- ther world without God's promifing it , and prefcribing con- ditions in order to it ? If fo , then this happwef is no free gift of God^ unlels he hath the bellowing and promifing of it? and man is no rational agent , unlefs a reward fuppofe con- ditions to be performed in order to the obtaining it ; or man may be bound to conditions which were never required him ; or if they muft be required , then there muft be a revelation of God's will^ whereby he doth require th^m : And if fb, then there are fome Records extant of the tranfadtions between Gc^ and man^ in order to his eternal happi?ief : For what reafbn can we have to imagine that fuch Records , if once •' mant ^ (liould not continue ftill, efpecially fince the fame goodnefs Chap.^. The Divine Authority of the Scriptures ajferted. 579, goodnefs of God is engaged to preferve fuch Records^ which at firft did cauie them to be indidled ? Supppfing then fuch Records extant (bmewhere in the world of thefe grand tranl^ aftions between God and mens fculs^ our bufinefs is brought to a feriod ; for what other Records are there in the world that can in the leaft 'vye with the Scripures^ as to the giving fo juft an account oi all the tranf aliens between God and men from the foundation of the world I Which gives us all ; t\it fieps^ methods and ways whereby God hath made known his mind and will to the world, in order to man's eternal ^ Salvation, It remains only then that we adore and magnifie the goodnefs of God in making known his ^ii^to us, and that we fet a vtlue and efteem on the Scriptures^ as on the only : authentick Inftruments of that Grand Charter of P^^t^e, which God hath revealed'in order to man's Eternal Happinefs^ ... ,, A. PMHvmHoti^M; F / N I 5, x w-c 40 - \' (» •« « *• • •. . •'V* f T ^• \ . t '♦^>f