Materiarian Theists acknowledged God to be a Perfectly-understanding Being and Such as had also Power over the Whole Matter of the Universe which was utterly unable to move it self or to produce any thing without him And all of them except the Anaxagoreans concluded that He was the Creator of all the Forms of Inanimate Bodies and of the Souls of Animals However it was Universally agreed upon amongst them that he was at least The Orderer and Disposer of all and that therefore he might upon that account well be called the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Maker or Framer of the World Notwithstanding which so long as they Maintained Matter to exist Independently upon God and sometimes also to be Refractory and Contumacious to him and by that means to be the Cause of Evli contrary to the Divine Will it is plain that they could not acknowledge the Divine Omnipotence according to the Full and Proper sence of it Which may also further appear from these Queries of Seneca concerning God Quantum Deus possit Materiam ipse sibi Formet an Datâ utatur Deus quicquid Vult efficiat An in multis rebus illuni Tractanda destituant à Magno Artifice Pravè formentur multa non quia cessat Ars sed quia id in quo exercetur saepe Inobsequens Arti est How far Gods Power does extend Whether he make his own Matter or only use that which is offered him Whether he can do whatsoever he will Or the Materials in many things Frustrate and Disappoint him and by that means things come to be Ill-framed by this great Artificer not because his Art fails him but because that which it is exercised upon proves Stubborn and Contumacious Wherefore I think we may well conclude that those Materiarian Theists had not a Right and Genuine Idea of God Nevertheless it does not therefore follow that they must needs be concluded Absolute Atheists for there may be a Latitude allowed in Theism and though in a strict and proper sence they be only Theists who acknowledge One God perfectly Omnipotent the Sole Original of of all things and as well the Cause of Matter as of any thing else yet it seems reasonable that such Consideration should be had of the Infirmity of Humane Understandings as to extend the Word further that it may comprehend within it those also who assert One Intellectual Principle Self-existent from Eternity the Framer and Governor of the whole World though not the Creator of the Matter and that none should be condemned for Absolute Atheists merely because they hold Eternal Vncreated Matter unless they also deny an Eternal Vnmade Mind ruling over the Matter and so make Sensless Matter the Sole Original of all things And this is certainly most agreeable to common apprehensions for Democritus and Epicurus would never have been condemned for Atheists merely for asserting Eternal Self-existent Atoms no more than Anaxagoras and Archelaus were who maintained the same thing had they not also denied that other Principle of theirs a Perfect Mind and concluded that the World was made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Without the ordering and disposal of any Vnderstanding Being that had all Happiness with Incorruptibility VIII The True and Proper Idea of God in its Most Contracted Form is this A Being Absolutely Perfect For this is that alone to which Necessary Existence is Essential and of which it is Demonstrable Now as Absolute Perfection includes in it all that belongs to the Deity so does it not only comprehend besides Necessary Existence Perfect Knowledge or Understanding but also Omni-causality and Omnipotence in the full extent of it otherwise called Infinite Power God is not only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Animans quo nihil in omni Natura praestantius as the Materiarian Theists describ'd him The Best Living Being nor as Zeno Eleates called him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Most Powerful of all things but he is also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Absolutely Omnipotent and Infinitely Powerful and therefore neither Matter nor any thing else can exist of it self Independently upon God but he is the Sole Principle and Source from which all things are derived But because this Infinite Power is a thing which the Atheists quarrel much withal as if it were altogether Vnintelligible and therefore Impossible we shall here briefly declare the Sence of it and render it as we think easily Intelligible or Conceivable in these Two following steps First that by Infinite Power is meant nothing else but Perfect Power or else as Simplicius calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Whole and Entire Power such as hath no Allay and Mixture of Impotency nor any Defect of Power mingled with it And then again that this Perfect Power which is also the same with Infinite is really nothing else but a Power of Producing and Doing all whatsoever is Conceivable and which does not imply a Contradiction for Conception is the Only Measure of Power and its Extent as shall be shewed more fully in due place Now here we think fit to observe that the Pagan Theists did themselves also vulgarly acknowledge Omnipotence as an Attribute of the Deity which might be proved from sundry Passages of their Writings Homer Od. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Deus aliud post aliud Jupiter Bonúmque Malúmque dat Potest enim Omnia And again Od. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Deus autem hoc dabit illud omittet Quodcunque ei libitum fuerit Potest enim Omnia To this Purpose also before Homer Linus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And after him Callimachus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All things are possible for God to do and nothing transcends his Power Thus also amongst the Latin Poets Virgil Aen. the First Sed Pater Omnipotens Speluncis abdidit Atris Again Aen. the Second At Pater Anchises oculos ad sydera laetus Extulit Coelo palmas cum Voce tetendit Jupiter Omnipotens precibus si flecteris ullis And Aen. the Fourth Talibus orantem dictis arásque tenentem Audiit Omnipotens Ovid in like manner Metamorph. 1. Tum Pater Omnipotens misso persregit Olympum Fulmine excussit subjectum Pelion Ossae And to cite no more Agatho an ancient Greek Poet is commended by Aristotle for affirming nothing to be exempted from the Power of God but only this that he cannot make That not to have been which hath been that is do what implies a Contradiction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hoc namque duntaxat negatum etiam Deo est Quae facta sunt Infecta posse reddere Lastly that the Atheists themselves under Paganism look'd upon Omnitence and Infinite Power as an Essential Attribute of the Deity appears plainly from Lucretius when he tells us that Epicurus in order to the Taking away of Religion set himself
Substance and fondly dreaming that the Vulgar Notion of a God is Nothing but such an Inadequate Conception of the Matter of the whole Vniverse Mistaken for an Entire Substance by it self the Cause of all things And thus far the Digression Page 172 XXXVIII That though the Confutation of the Atheistick Grounds according to the Laws of Method ought to have been reserved for the last part of this Discourse yet we having reason to violate those Laws crave the Reader 's Pardon for this Preposterousness A considerable Observation of Plato's That it is not onely Gross Sensuality which inclines men to Atheize but also an Affectation of seeming Wiser than the Generality of mankind As likewise that the Atheists making such Pretence to Wit it is a seasonable and proper Vndertaking to Evince that they Fumble in all their Ratiocinations And we hope to make it appear that the Atheists are no Conjurers and that all Forms of Atheism are Nonsense and Impossibility Page 174 CHAP. IV. The Idea of God declared in way of Answer to the First Atheistick Argument and the Grand Objection against the Naturality of this Idea as Essentially including Vnity or Oneliness in it from the Pagan Polytheism removed Proved That the Intelligent Pagans Generally acknowledged One Supreme Deity A fuller Explication of whose Polytheism and Idolatry intended in order to the better giving an Accompt of Christianity I. THE either Stupid Insensibility or Gross Impudence of Atheists in denying the Word God to have any Signification or that there is any other Idea answering to it besides the meer Phantasm of the Sound The Disease called by the Philosopher 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Petrification or Dead Insensibility of the Mind Page 192 II. That the Atheists themselves must needs have an Idea of God in their Minds or otherwise when they deny his Existence they should deny the Existence of Nothing That they have also the same Idea of him in Generall with the Theists the One Denying the very same thing which the Others Affirm Page 194 III. A Lemma or Preparatory Proposition to the Idea of God That though some things be Made or Generated yet it is not possible that all things should be Made but something must of necessity Exist of it Self from Eternity Unmade and be the Cause of those other things that are Made ibid. IV. The Two most Opposite Opinions concerning what was Self-Existent from Eternity or Unmade and the Cause of all other things Made One That it was Nothing but Sensless Matter the Most Imperfect of all things The Other That it was Something Most Perfect and therefore Consciously Intellectual The Asserters of this Latter opinion Theists in a Strict and Proper Sense of the Former Atheists So that the Idea of God in Generall is A Perfect Consciously Understanding Being or Mind Self-Existent from Eternity and the Cause of all other things Page 194 195. V. Observable That the Atheists who deny a God according to the True Idea of him do Notwithstanding often Abuse the Word calling Sensless Matter by that name they meaning Nothing else thereby but onely a First Principle or Self-Existent Unmade thing according to which Notion of the word God there can be no such thing at all as an Atheist no man being able to persuade himself That all things sprung from Nothing Page 195 VI. In order to a more Punctual Declaration of this Divine Idea the Opinion of those taken notice of who suppose Two Self-Existent Unmade Principles God and Matter according to which God not the Principle of all things nor the Sole Principle but onely the Chief Page 196 197. VII These Materiarians Imperfect and Mistaken Theists Not Atheists because they suppose the World Made and Governed by an Animalish Sentient and Understanding Nature whereas no Atheists acknowledge Conscious Animality to be a First Principle but conclude it to be all Generable and Corruptible Nor yet Genuine Theists because they acknowledge not Omnipotence in the full Extent thereof A Latitude therefore in Theism and none to be condemned for Absolute Atheists but such as deny an Eternal Unmade Mind the Framer and Governour of the whole World Page 198 199. VIII An Absolutely Perfect Being the most Compendious Idea of God Which Includeth in it not onely Necessary Existence and Conscious Intellectuality but also Omni-Causality Omnipotence or Infinite Power Wherefore God the Sole Principle of all things and Cause of Matter The True Notion of Infinite Power And that Pagans commonly acknowledged Omnipotence or Infinite Power to be included in the Idea of God Page 200 201. IX That Absolute Perfection implies yet something more than Knowledge and Power A Vaticination in mens Minds of a Higher Good than either That according to Aristotle God is better than Knowledge and hath Morality in his Nature wherein also his Chief Happiness consisteth This borrowed from Plato to whom the Highest Perfection and Supreme Deity is Goodness it self Substantiall above Knowledge and Intellect Agreeably with which the Scripture makes God and the Supreme Good Love This not to be understood of a Soft Fond and Partiall Love God being rightly called also an Impartial Law and the Measure of all things Atheists also suppose Goodness to be included in the Idea of that God whose Existence they deny This Idea here more largely declared Page 202 203 c. X. That this forementioned Idea of God Essentially Includeth Unity Oneliness or Solitariety in it since there cannot possibly be more than One Absolutely Supreme One Cause of All things One Omnipotent and One Infinitely Perfect Epicurus and his Followers professedly denyed a God according to this Notion of him Page 207 XI The Grand Objection against the Idea of God as thus Essentially Including Oneliness and Singularity in it from the Polytheism of all Nations formerly the Jews excepted and of all the Wisest men and Philosophers From whence it is Inferred that this Idea of God is not Natural but Artificial and owes its Original to Laws and Arbitrary Institutions onely An Enquiry therefore here to be made concerning the True Sense of the Pagan Polytheism the Objectors securely taking it for granted that the Pagan Polytheists universally asserted Many Unmade Self-Existent Intellectual Beings and Independent Deities as so many Partial Causes of the World Page 208 209. XII The Irrationality of which Opinion and its manifest Repugnancy to the Phaenomena render it less probable to have been the Belief of all the Pagan Polytheists Page 210 XIII That the Pagan Deities were not all of them Vniversally look'd upon as so many Unmade Self-Existent Beings Vnquestionably Evident from hence Because they Generally held a Theogonia or Generation of Gods This Point of the Pagan Theology insisted upon by Herodotus the most ancient Prosaïck Greek Writer In whom the meaning of that Question Whether the Gods were Generated or Existed all from Eternity seems to have been the same with this of Plato's Whether the World were Made or Unmade Page 211 Certain also that amongst
fall down into these Earthly Bodies But the fullest Record of the Empedoclean Philosophy concerning the Soul is contained in this of Hierocles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Man falleth from his Happy State as Empedocles the Pythagorean saith By being a Fugitive Apostate and Wanderer from God acted with a certain Mad and Irrational Strife or Contention But he ascends again and recovers his former State if he decline and avoid these Earthly things and despise this unpleasant and wretched Place where Murder and Wrath and a Troop of all other Mischiefs reign Into which Place they who fall wander up and down through the Field of Ate and Darkness But the desire of him that flees from this Field of Ate carries him on towards the Field of Truth which the Soul at first relinquishing and losing its Wings fell down into this Earthly Body deprived of its Happy Life From whence it appears that Plato's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was derived from Empedocles and the Pythagoreans Now from what hath been already cited it is sufficiently manifest that Empedocles was so far from being either an Atheist or Corporealist that he was indeed a Rank Pythagorist as he is here called And we might adde hereunto what Clemens Alexandrinus observes that according to Empedocles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. If we live holily and justly we shall be happy here and more happy after our departure hence having our Happiness not necessarily confined to time but being able to rest and fix in it to all Eternity Feasting with the other Immortal Beings c. We might also take notice how besides the Immortal Souls of men he acknowledged Daemons or Angels declaring that some of these fell from Heaven and were since prosecuted by a Divine Nemesis or these in Plutarch are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Those Empedoclean Daemons lapsed from Heaven and pursued with Divine Vengeance Whose restless Torment is there described in several Verses of his And we might observe likewise how he acknowledged a Natural and Immutable Justice which was not Topical and confined to Places and Countries and Relative to particular Laws but Catholick and Universal and every where the same through Infinite Light and Space as he expresses it with Poetick Pomp and Bravery 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And the asserting of Natural Morality is no small Argument of a Theist But what then shall we say to those other things which Empedocles is charged with by Aristotle that seem to have so rank a smell of Atheism Certainly those Mongril and Biforme Animals that are said to have sprung up out of the Earth by chance look as if they were more a-kin to Democritus than Empedocles and probably it is the Fault of the Copies that it is read otherwise there being no other Philosopher that I know of that could ever find any such thing in Empedocles his Poems But for the rest if Aristotle do not misrepresent Empedocles as he often doth Plato then it must be granted that he being a Mechanical Physiologer as well as Theologer did something too much indulge to Fortuitous Mechanism which seems to be an Extravagancy that Mechanical Philosophers and Atomists have been always more or less subject to But Aristotle doth not charge Empedocles with resolving all things into Fortuitous Mechanism as some Philosophers have done of late who yet pretend to be Theists and Incorporealists but only that he would explain some things in that way Nay he clearly puts a difference betwixt Empedocles and the Democritick Atheists in those words subjoyned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. which is as if he should have said Empedocles resolved some things in the Fabrick and structure of Animals into Fortuitous Mechanism but there are certain other Philosophers namely Leucippus and Democritus who would have all things whatsoever in the whole World Heaven and Earth and Animals to be made by Chance and the Fortuitous Motion of Atoms without a Deity It seems very plain that Empedocles his Philia and Nichos his Friendship and Discord which he makes to be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Active Cause and Principle of Motion in the Universe was a certain Plastick Power superiour to Fortuitous Mechanism and Aristotle himself acknowledges somewhere as much And Plutarch tells us that according to Empedocles The Order and System of the World is not the Result of Material Causes and Fortuitous Mechanism but of a Divine Wisdom assigning to every thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Not such a Place as Nature would give it but such as is most convenient for the Good of the whole Simplicius who had read Empedocles acquaints us that he made two Worlds the one Intellectual the other Sensible and the former of these to be the Exemplar and Archetype of the latter And so the Writer De Placitis Philosophorum observes that Empedocles made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Two Suns the one Archetypal and Intelligible the other Apparent or Sensible But I need take no more pains to purge Empedocles from those two Imputations of Corporealism and Atheism since he hath so fully confuted them himself in those Fragments of his still extant First by expressing such a hearty Resentment of the Excellency of Piety and the Wretchedness and Sottishness of Atheism in these Verses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To this Sence He is happy who hath his mind richly fraught and stored with the Treasures of Divine Knowledge but he miserable whose mind is Darkened as to the Belief of a God And Secondly by denying God to have any Humane Form or Members 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Or otherwise to be Corporeal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And then positively affirming what he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Only a Holy and Ineffable Mind that by Swift Thoughts agitates the whole World XXV And now we shall speak something also of Anaxagoras having shewed before that he was a Spurious Atomist For he likewise agreed with the other Atomists in this that he asserted Incorporeal Substance in general as the Active Cause and Principle of Motion in the Universe and Particularly an Incorporeal Deity distinct from the World Affirming that there was besides Atoms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it is express'd in Plato An Ordering and Disposing Mind that was the Cause of all things Which Mind as Aristotle tells us he made to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The only Simple Vnmixed and Pure thing in the World And he supposed this to be that which brought the Confused Chaos of Omnisarious Atoms into that Orderly Compages of the World that now is XXVI And by this time we have made it evident that those Atomical Physiologers that
Nature for that Motion Wherefore the Divine Law and Command by which the things of Nature are administred must be conceived to be the Real Appointment of some Energetick Effectual and Operative Cause for the Production of every Effect 3. Now to assert the Former of these Two things that all the Effects of Nature come to pass by Material and Mechanical Necessity or the mere Fortuitous Motion of Matter without any Guidance or Direction is a thing no less Irrational than it is Impious and Atheistical Not only because it is utterly Unconceivable and Impossible that such Infinite Regularity and Artificialness as is every where throughout the whole World should constantly result out of the Fortuitous Motion of Matter but also because there are many such Particular Phaenomena in Nature as do plainly transcend the Powers of Mechanism of which therefore no Sufficient Mechanical Reasons can be devised as the Motion of Respiration in Animals as there are also other Phaenomena that are perfectly Cross to the Laws of Mechanism as for Example that of the Distant Poles of the Aequator and Ecliptick which we shall insist upon afterward Of both which kinds there have been other Instances proposed by my Learned Friend Dr. More in his Enchiridion Metaphysicum and very ingeniously improved by him to this very purpose namely to Evince that there is something in Nature besides Mechanism and consequently Substance Incorporeal Moreover those Theists who Philosophize after this manner by resolving all the Corporeal Phaenomena into Fortuitous Mechanism or the Necessary and Vnguided Motion of Matter make God to be nothing else in the World but an Idle Spectator of the Various Results of the Fortuitous and Necessary Motions of Bodies and render his Wisdom altogether Useless and Insignificant as being a thing wholly Inclosed and shut up within his own breast and not at all acting abroad upon any thing without him Furthermore all such Mechanists as these whether Theists or Atheists do according to that Judicious Censure passed by Aristotle long since upon Democritus but substitute as it were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Carpenters or Artificers Wooden Hand moved by Strings and Wires in stead of a Living Hand They make a kind of Dead and Wooden World as it were a Carved Statue that hath nothing neither Vital nor Magical at all in it Whereas to those who are Considerative it will plainly appear that there is a Mixture of Life or Plastick Nature together with Mechanism which runs through the whole Corporeal Universe And whereas it is pretended not only that all Corporeal Phaenomena may be sufficiently salved Mechanically without any Final Intending and Directive Causality but also that all other Reasons of things in Nature besides the Material and Mechanical are altogether Vnphilosophical the same Aristotle ingeniously exposes the Ridiculousness of this Pretence after this manner telling us That it is just as if a Carpenter Joyner or Carver should give this accompt as the only Satisfactory of any Artificial Fabrick or Piece of Carved Imagery 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that because the Instruments Axes and Hatchets Plains and Chissels happened to fall so and so upon the Timber cutting it here and there that therefore it was hollow in one place and plain in another and the like and by that means the whole came to be of such a Form For is it not altogether as Absurd and Ridiculous for men to undertake to give an accompt of the Formation and Organization of the Bodies of Animals by mere Fortuitous Mechanism without any Final or Intending Causality as why there was an Heart here and Brains there and why the Heart had so many and such different Valves in the Entrance and Out-let of its Ventricles and why all the other Organick Parts Veins and Arteries Nerves and Muscles Bones and Cartilages with the Joints and Members were of such a Form Because forsooth the Fluid Matter of the Seed happened to move so and so in several places and thereby to cause all those Differences which are also divers in different Animals all being the Necessary Result of a certain Quantity of Motion at first indifferently impressed upon the small Particles of the Matter of this Universe turned round in a Vortex But as the same Aristotle adds no Carpenter or Artificer is so simple as to give such an Accompt as this and think it satisfactory but he will rather declare that himself directed the Motion of the Instruments after such a manner and in order to such Ends 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Carpenter would give a better account than so for he would not think it sufficient to say that the Fabrick came to be of such a form because the Instruments happened to fall so and so but he will tell you that it was because himself made such strokes and that he directed the Instruments and determined their motion after such a manner to this End that he might make the Whole a Fabrick fit and useful for such purposes And this is to assign the Final Cause And certainly there is scarcely any man in his Wits that will not acknowledge the Reason of the different Valves in the Heart from the apparent Usefulness of them according to those particular Structures of theirs to be more Satisfactory than any which can be brought from mere Fortuitous Mechanism or the Unguided Motion of the Seminal Matter 4. And as for the Latter Part of the Disjunction That every thing in Nature should be done Immediately by God himself this as according to Vulgar Apprehension it would render Divine Providence Operose Sollicitous and Distractious and thereby make the Belief of it to be entertained with greater difficulty and give advantage to Atheists so in the Judgment of the Writer De Mundo it is not so Decorous in respect of God neither that he should 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 set his own Hand as it were to every Work and immediately do all the Meanest and Triflingest things himself Drudgingly without making use of any Inferior and Subordinate Instruments 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. If it were not congruous in respect of the State Majesty of Xerxes the Great King of Persia that he should condescend to do all the meanest Offices himself much less can this be thought decorous in respect of God But it seems far more August and becoming of the Divine Majesty that a certain Power and Vertue derived from him and passing through the Vniverse should move the Sun and Moon and be the Immediate Cause of those lower things done here upon Earth Moreover it seems not so agreeable to Reason neither that Nature as a Distinct thing from the Deity should be quite Superseded or made to Signifie Nothing God himself doing all things Immediately and Miraculously from whence it would follow also that they are all done either Forcibly and Violently or else Artificially only and none of them by any Inward Principle of their own Lastly
of Darkness Another God makes a World out of it c. And again afterwards he writes further to the same purpose Discat ergò Faustus Monarchiae Opinionem non ex Gentibus nos habere sed Gentes non usque adeò ad Falsos Deos esse dilapsas ut Opinionem amitterent Vnius Veri Dei ex quo est Omnis qualiscunque Natura Let Faustus therefore know that We Christians have not derived the Opinion of Monarchy from the Pagans but that the Pagans have not so far degenerated sinking down into the Worship of false Gods as to have lost the Opinion of One True God from whom is all Whatsoever Nature XIV It follows from what we have declared that the Pagan Polytheism or Multiplicity of Gods is not to be understood in the sence before expressed of Many 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Many Vnproduced and Self-existent Deities but according to some other Notion or Equivocation of the word Gods For God is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one of those words that hath been used in many different sences the Atheists themselves acknowledging a God and Gods according to some Private Sences of their own which yet they do not all agree in neither and Theists not always having the same Notion of that Word Forasmuch as Angels in Scripture are called Gods in one sence that is as Vnderstanding Beings Superiour to men Immortal Holy and Happy and the word is again sometimes carried down lower to Princes and Magistrates and not only so but also to Good men as such when they are said to be Made Partakers of the Divine Nature And thus that learned Philosopher and Christian Boethius Omnis Beatus Deus sed Natura quidem Vnus Participatione verò nihil prohibet esse quamplurimos every Good and Happy man is a God and though there be only One God by Nature yet nothing hinders but that there may be Many by Participation But then again all Men and Angels are alike denied to be Gods in other Respects and particularly as to Religious Worship Thou shalt Worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou Serve Now this is that which seems to be Essentially included in the Pagan Notion of the word God or Gods when taken in general namely a Respect to Religious Worship Wherefore a God in general according to the sence of the Pagan Theists may be thus defined An Vnderstanding Being superiour to Men not originally derived from Sensless Matter and look'd upon as an Object for mens Religious Worship But this general Notion of the word God is again restrained and limited by Differences in the Division of it For such a God as this may be either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ingenerate or Vnproduced and consequently Self-existent or else 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Generated or Produced and Dependent on some Higher Being as its Cause In the former sence the Intelligent Pagans as we have declared acknowledged only One God who was therefore called by them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to that of Thales in Laertius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God is the oldest of all things because he is Vnmade or Vnproduced and the only thing that is so but in the latter they admitted of Many Gods Many Vnderstanding Beings which though Generated or Produced yet were Superiour to Men and look'd upon as Objects for their Religious Worship And thus the Pagan Theists were both Polytheists and Monotheists in different Sences they acknowledged both Many Gods and One God that is Many Inferiour Deities subordinate to One Supreme Thus Onatus the Pythagorean in Stobaeus declares himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It seemeth to me that there is not only One God but that there is One the Greatest and Highest God that governeth the whole World and that there are Many other Gods besides him differing as to power that One God reigning over them all who surmounts them all in Power Greatness and Vertue This is that God who conteins and comprehends the whole World but the other Gods are those who together with the Revolution of the Vniverse orderly follow that First and Intelligible God Where it is evident that Onatus his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Many Gods were only the Heavenly Bodies or Animated Stars And partly from those words cited but chiefly others which follow after in the same place that will be produced elsewhere it plainly appears that in Onatus his time there were some who acknowledged One Only God denying all those other Gods then commonly Worshipped And indeed Anaxagoras seems to have been such a one forasmuch as asserting One Perfect Mind Ruling over all which is the True Deity he effectually degraded all those other Pagan Gods the Sun Moon and Stars from their Godships by making the Sun nothing but a Globe of Fire and the Moon Earth and Stones and the like of the other Stars and Planets And some such there were also amongst the Ancient Egyptians as shall be declared in due place Moreover Proclus upon Plato's Timaeus tells us that there hath been always less doubt and controversie in the World concerning the One God than concerning the Many Gods Wherefore Onatus here declares his own sence as to this particular viz. that besides the One Supreme God there were also Many other Inferiour Deities that is Vnderstanding Beings that ought to be Religiously Worshipped But because it is not impossible but that there might be imagin'd One Supreme Deity though there were many other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vnmade made and Self-existent Gods besides as Plutarch supposed before One Supreme God together with a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Irrational Soul or Daemon Vnmade Inferiour in power to it therefore we add in the next place that the more Intelligent Pagans did not only assert One God that was Supreme and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the most Powerful of all the Gods but also who being Omnipotent was the Principle and Cause of all the rest and therefore the only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the only Vnproduced and Self-existent Deity Maximus Tyrius affirms this to have been the general sence of all the Pagans that there was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One God the King and Father of all and many Gods the Sons of God reigning together with God Neither did the Poets imply any thing less when 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was so often called by the Greeks and Jupiter by the Latins 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Hominum Pater atque Deorum or Hominum Satórque Deorum and the like And indeed the Theogonia of the ancient Pagans before mention'd was commonly thus declared by them universally 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Gods were Generated or as Herodotus expresseth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that every one of the Gods was Generated or Produced which yet is not so to be understood as if they had therefore supposed no God at all Vnmade or Self-exâ—stent which is Absolute Atheism but that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the
which Mind is the same with God Thus Themistius speaking of Anaxagoras 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He was the first that is amongst the Ionick Philosophers who brought in Mind and God to the Cosmopoeia and did not derive all things from Sensless Bodies And to the same purpose Plutarch in the Life of Pericles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The other Ionick Philosophers before Anaxagoras made Fortune and blind Necessity that is the Fortuitous and Necessary Motions of the Matter to be the only Original of the World but Anaxagoras was the first who affirmed a pure and sincere Mind to preside over all Anaxagoras therefore supposed Two Substantial Self-existent Principles of the Universe one an Infinite Mind or God the other an Infinite Homoiomery of Matter or Infinite Atoms not Unqualified such as those of Empedocles and Democritus which was the most Ancient and Genuine Atomology but Similar such as were severally endued with all manner of Qualities and Forms which Physiology of his therefore was a spurious kind of Atomism Anaxagoras indeed did not suppose God to have created Matter out of nothing but that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Principle of its Motion and also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Regulator of this motion for Good and consequently the Cause of all the Order Pulchritude and Harmony of the World for which reason this Divine Principle was called also by him not only Mind but Good it being that which act the Sake of Good Wherefore according to Anaxagoras First the World was not Eternal but had a Beginning in time and before the World was made there was from Eternity an Infinite Congeries of Similar and Qualified Atoms Self-existent without either Order or Motion Secondly The World was not afterwards made by Chance but by Mind or God first moving the Matter and then directing the Motion of it so as to bring it into this orderly System and Compages So that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mind the first Maker of the World and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mind that which still governs the same the King and Sovereign Monarch of Heaven and Earth Thirdly Anaxagoras his Mind and God was purely Incorporeal to which purpose his words recorded by Simplicius are very remarkable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mind is mingled with nothing but is alone by it self and separate for if it were not by it self secrete from Matter but mingled therewith it would then partake of all things because there is something of all in every thing which things mingled together with it would hinder it so that it could not master or conquer any thing as if alone by it self for Mind is the most Subtil of all things and the most Pure and has the knowledge of all things together with an absolute Power over all Lastly Anaxagoras did not suppose a Multitude of Unmade Minds coexistent from Eternity as so many partial Causes and Governours of the World but only One Infinite Mind or God ruling over All. Indeed it may well be made a Question whether or no besides this Supreme and Universal Deity Anaxagoras did acknowledge any of those other Inferiour Gods then Worshipped by the Pagans because it is certain that though he asserted Infinite Mind to be the Maker and Governour of the whole World yet he was accused by the Athenians for Atheism and besides a Mulct impos'd upon him Banished for the same the true ground whereof was no other than this because he affirmed the Sun to be nothing but a Mass of Fire and the Moon and Earth having Mountains and Valleys Cities and Houses in it and probably concluded the same of all the other Stars and Planets that they were either Fires as the Sun or Habitable Earths as the Moon wherein supposing them not to be Animated he did consequently deny them to be Gods Which his Ungodding of the Sun Moon and Stars was then look'd upon by the Vulgar as nothing less than absolute Atheism they being very prone to think that if there were not Many Understanding Beings Superiour to Men and if the Sun Moon and Stars were not such and therefore in their Language Gods there was no God at all Neither was it the Vulgar only who condemned Anaxagoras for this but even those Two grave Philosophers Socrates and Plato did the like the First in his Apology made to the Athenians where he calls this opinion of Anaxagoras Absurd the Second in his Book of Laws where he complains of this Doctrine as a great In-let into Atheism in this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When You and I endeavouring by Arguments to prove that there are Gods speak of the Sun and Moon Stars and Earth as Gods and Divine Things our young men presently being principled by these new Philosophers will reply that these are nothing but Earth and Stones Sensless and Inanimate Bodies which therefore cannot mind nor take notice of any Humane affairs Where we may observe these Two things First that nothing was accounted truly and properly a God amongst the Pagans but only what was endued with Life and Vnderstanding Secondly that the taking away of those Inferiour Gods of the Pagans the Sun Moon and Stars by denying them to be Animated or to have Life and Understanding in them was according to Plato's Judgment then the most ready and effectual way to introduce Absolute Atheism Moreover it is true that though this Anaxagoras were a professed Theist he asserting an Infinite Self-existent Mind to be the Maker of the whole World yet he was severely taxed also by Aristotle and Plato as one not thorough-paced in Theism and who did not so fully as he ought adhere to his own Principles For whereas to assert Mind to be the Maker of the World is really all one as to assert Final Causality for things in Nature as also that they were made after the Best manner Anaxagoras when he was to give his particular account of the Phaenomena did commonly betake himself to Material Causes only and hardly ever make use of the Mental or Final Cause but when he was to seek and at a loss then only bringing in God upon the Stage Socrates his discourse concerning this in Plato's Pâ—aedo is very well worth our taking notice of Hearing one sometime read saith he out of a Book of Anaxagoras 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Mind was the Orderer and Cause of all things I was exceedingly pleased herewith concluding that it must needs follow from thence that All things were ordered and disposed of as they should and after the best manner possible and therefore the Causes even of the things in Nature or at least the grand Strokes of them ought to be fetched from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That which is Absolutely the Best But when afterwards I took Anaxagoras his Book into my hand greedily reading it over I was exceedingly disappointed of my expectation finding therein no other Causes
Stratonick or Hylozoick Atheism because Sense and Conscious Vnderstanding could no more result either from those Qualities of Heat and Cold Moist and Dry contempered together or from the meer Organization of Inanimate and Sensless Matter than it could from the Concursus Motus Ordo Positura Figurae of Atoms devoid of all manner of Qualities Had there been once nothing but Sensless Matter Fortuitously Moved there could never have emerged into Being any Soul or Mind Sense and Vnderstanding because no Effect can possibly transcend the Perfection of its Cause Wherefore Atheists supposing Themselves and all Souls and Minds to have sprung from Stupid and Sensless Matter and all that Wisdom which is any where in the World both Political and Philosophical to be the Result of meer Fortune and Chance must needs be concluded to be Grosly Ignorant of Causes which had they not been they could never have been Atheists So that Ignorance of Causes is the Seed not of Theism but of Atheism true Philosophy and the Knowledge of the Cause of our Selves leading necessarily to a Deity Again Atheists are Ignorant of the Cause of Motion in Bodies also by which notwithstanding they suppose all things to be done that is they are never able to Salve this Phaenomenon so long as they are Atheists and acknowledge no other Substance besides Matter or Body For First it is undeniably certain that Motion is not Essential to all Body as such because then no Particles of Matter could ever Rest and consequently there could have been no Generation nor no such Mundane System produced as this is which requires a certain Proportionate Commixture of Motion and Rest no Sun nor Moon nor Earth nor Bodies of Animals since there could be no Coherent Consistency of any thing when all things flutter'd and were in continual Separation and Divulsion from one another Again it is certain likewise that Matter or Body as such hath no Power of Moving it self Freely or Spontaneously neither by Will or Appetite both because the same Inconvenience would from hence ensue likewise and because the Phaenomena or Appearances do plainly evince the contrary And as for that Prodigiously Absurd Paradox of some few Hylozoick Atheists that all Matter as such and therefore every Smallest Particle thereof hath not only Life Essentially belonging to it but also Perfect Wisdom and Knowledge together with Appetite and Self-moving Power though without Animal Sense or Consciousness this I say will be elsewhere in due place further confuted But the Generality of the ancient Atheists that is the Anaximandrians and Democriticks attributed no manner of Life to Matter as such and therefore could ascribe no Voluntary or Spontaneous Motion to the same but Fortuitous only according to that of the Epicurean Poet already cited Nam certè neque Consilio Primordia rerum Ordine se quaeque atque sagaci mente locarunt Nec quos quaeque darent Motus pepigere profectó Wherefore these Democriticks as Aristotle somewhere intimates were able to assign no other Cause of Motion than only this That One Body moved another from Eternity Infinitely so that there was no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no First Vnmoved Mover ever to be found because there is no Beginning nor First in Eternity From whence probably that Doctrine of some Atheistick Stoicks in Alex. Aphrodisius was derived That there is no First in the rank and order of Causes In the footsteps of which Philosophers a Modern Writer seemeth to have trodden when declaring himself after this manner Si quis ab Effectu quocunque ad Causam ejus Immediatam atque inde and Remotiorem ac sic perpetuò ratiocinatione ascenderit non tamen in aeternum procedere poterit sed defatigatus aliquando deficiet If any one will from whatsoever Effect ascend upward to its Immediate Cause and from thence to a Remoter and so onwards perpetually in his Ratiocination yet shall he never be able to hold on thorough all Eternity but at length being quite tyred out with his Journey be forced to desist or give over Which seems to be all one as if he should have said One thing Moved or Caused another Infinitely from Eternity in which there being no Beginning there is consequently no First Mover or Cause to be reach'd unto But this Infinite Progress of these Democriticks in the Order of Causes and their shifting off the Cause of Motion from one thing to another without end or beginning was rightly understood by Aristotle to be indeed the Assigning of No Cause of Motion at all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They acknowledging saith he no First Mover according to Nature must needs make an idle Progress Infinitely that is in the Language of this Philosopher assign no Cause at all of Motion Epicurus therefore to mend the matter though according to the Principles of the Atomick Physiology he discarded all other Qualities yet did he notwithstanding admit this One Quality of Gravity or Ponderosity in Atoms pressing them continually downwards in Infinite Space In which as nothing could be more Absurd nor Vnphilosophical than to make Vpwards and Downwards in Infinite Space or a Gravity tending to no Centre nor Place of Rest so did he not assign any Cause of Motion neither but only in effect affirm the Atoms therefore to tend Downwards because they did so a Quality of Gravity signifying only an Endeavour to tend Downwards but Why or Wherefore no body knows And it is all one as if Epicurus should have said that Atoms moved Downwards by an Occult Quality he either betaking himself to this as an Asylum a Sanctuary or Refuge for his Ignorance or else indeed more absurdly making his very Ignorance it self disguized under that name of a Quality to be the Cause of Motion Thus the Atheists universally either assigned no Cause at all for Motion as the Anaximandrians and Democriticks or else no True one as the Hylozoists when to avoid Incorporeal Substance they would venture to attribute Perfect Vnderstanding Appetite or Will and Self-moving Power to all Sensless Matter whatsoever But since it appears plainly that Matter or Body cannot Move it self either the Motion of all Bodies must have no manner of Cause or else must there of necessity be some other Substance besides Body such as is Self-active and Hylarchical or hath a Natural Power of Ruling over Matter Upon which latter account Plato rightly determin'd that Cogitation which is Self-activity or Autochinesie was in order of Nature before the Local Motion of Body which is Heterochinesie Though Motion considered Passively in Bodies or taken for their Translation or Change of Distance and Place be indeed a Corporeal thing or a Mode of those Bodies themselves moving yet as it is considered Actively for the Vis Movens that Active Force which causes this Translation or Change of Place so is it an Incorporeal thing the Energy of a Self-Active Substance upon that sluggish Matter or Body which cannot at all move it self Wherefore in the Bodies of
Thought From whence it ought to be concluded that Cogitation is no Accident or Mode of Matter or Bulky Extension but a Mode or Attribute of another Substance Really distinct from Matter or Incorporeal There is indeed Nothing else clearly conceivable by us in Body or Bulky Extension but only more or less Magnitude of Parts Figures Site Motion or Rest and all the Different Bodies that are in the whole World are but several Combinations or Syllables made up out of these few Letters but no Magnitudes Figures Sites and Motions can Possibly Spell or Compound Life and Sense Cogitation and Vnderstanding as the Syllables thereof and therefore to suppose these to be Generated out of Matter is plainly to suppose some Real Entity to be brought out of Nothing or Something to be made without a Cause which is Impossible But that which hath principally confirmed men in this Errour is the business of Sensible Qualities and Forms as they are vulgarly conceived to be distinct Entities from those forementioned Modifications of Matter in respect of Magnitude of Parts Figure Site Motion or Rest. For since these Qualities and Forms are unquestionably Generated and Corrupted there seems to be no Reason why the same might not be as well acknowledged of Life Sense Cogitation and Vnderstanding that these are but Qualities or Accidents of Matter also â—hough of another Kind and consequently may be Generated out of it without the Making of any Real thing out of Nothing But the Democritick and Epicurean Atheists themselves have from the Principles of the Atomick Philosophy sufficiently Confuted and Rectified this mistake concerning Sensible Qualities they exploding and banishing them all as conceived to be Entities Really distinct from the forementioned Modifications of Matter and that for this very reason Because the Generation of them would upon this supposition be the Production of Something out of Nothing or without a Cause and concluding them therefore to be Really Nothing else but Mechanism or different Modifications of Matter in respect of the Magnitude of Parts Figure Site and Motion or Rest they only Causing different Phancies and Apparitions in us And in very truth this vulgar opinion of Real Qualities of Bodies seems to have no other Original at all than mens mistaking their own Phancies Passions and Affections for things Really Existing in the Objects without them For as Sensible Qualities are conceived to be things distinct from the forementioned â—odifications of Matter so are they Really Nothing but our own Phancies Passions and Affections and Consequently no Accidents or Modifications of Matter but Accidents and Modifications of our own Souls which are Substances Incorporeal Now if these Democritick and Epicurean Atheists themselves concluded that Real Qualities considered as distinct from the Modifications of Matter could not possibly be Generated out of it because this would be the Production of Something out of Nothng they ought certainly much more to have acknowledged the same concerning Life and Cogitation Sense and Vnderstanding that the Generation of these out of sensless Matter would be an Impossible Production of Something out of Nothing and consequently that these are therefore no Corporeal Things but the Attributes Properties or Modes of Substance Incorporeal since they can no way be Resolved into Mechanism and Phancy or the Modifications of Matter as the Vulgar Sensible Qualities may and ought to be For though the Democriticks and Epicureans did indeed suppose all humane Cogitations to be Caused or Produced by the Incursion of Corporeal Atoms upon the Thinker yet did never any of them arrive to such a degree either of Sottishness or Impudence as a Modern Writer hath done to maintain that Cogitation Intellection and Volition are themselves really Nothing else but Local Motion or Mechanism in the inward Parts of the Brain and Heart or that Mens nihil aliud praeterquam Motus in partibus quibusdam Corporis Organici that Mind it self is Nothing but Motion in some parts of the Organized Body who therefore as if Cartesius had not been sufficiently Paradoxical in making Brute Animals though supposed by him to be devoid of all Cogitation Nothing but meer Machines and not contented herewith hath advanced much further in making this Prodigious Conclusion that all Cogitative Beings and Men themselves are Really Nothing else but Machines and Automata whereas he might as well have affirmed Heaven to be Earth Colour to be Sound Number to be Figure or any thing else in the world to be any thing as Cogitation and Local Motion to be very self same thing Nevertheless so strong was the Atheistick Intoxication in those Old Democriticks and Epicureans that though denying Real Qualities of Bodies for this very reason because Nothing could be Produced our of Nothing they Notwithstanding contradicting themselves would make Sense Life and Vnderstanding to be Qualities of Matter and therefore Generable out of it and so Unquestionably Produced Real Entities out of Nothing or Without a Cause Moreover it is observable that Epicurus having a mind to assert Contingent Liberty in men in way of opposition to that Necessity of all Humane Actions which had been before maintained by Democritus and his Followers plainly acknowledges that he could not Possibly do this according to the Grounds of his own Philosophy without supposing something of Contingency in the First Principles that is in the Motion of those Atoms out of which men and other Animals are Made Si semper motus connectitur omnis Et Vetere exoritur semper Novus Ordine Certo Nec Declinando faciunt Primor dia Motus Principium quoddam quod Fati foedera rumpat Ex Infinito ne Causam Causa sequatur Libera per Terras unde haec Animantibus extat Vnde est haec inquam Fatis Avolsa Voluntas The reason for which is afterwards thus expressed by him Quoniam De Nihilo Nil fit because Nothing can be Made out of Nothing Upon which account he therefore ridiculously Feigned besides his Two other Motions of Atoms from Pondus and Plagae Weight and Strokes a Third Motion of them which he calls Clinamen Principiorum a Contingent and Vncertain Declination every way from the Perpendicular out of Design to salve this Phaenomenon of Free Will in men Without bringing Something out of Nothing according as he thus subjoyneth Quare in Seminibus quoque idem fateare necesse est Esse aliam praeter Plagas Pondera causam Motibus unde haec est nobis Innata Potestas De NIHILO quoniam FIERI NIL posse videmus Pondus enim prohibet ne Plagis omnia fiant Externa quasi Vi. Sed ne Mens ipsa Necessum Intestinum habeat cunctis in rebus agendis Et devicta quasi cogatur Ferre Patique Id facit Exiguum CEINAMEN PRINCIPIORVM Nec ratione loci certa nec tempore certo Now if Epicurus himself conceived that Liberty of Will could not possibly be Generated in Men out of Matter or Atoms they having no such thing at all in
the Rational Soul the Incorporeity of any Substance and by consequence the Existence of any Deity distinct from the Corporeal World And as for that Pretence of theirs that Senseless Matter may as well become Sensitive and as it were kindled into Life and Cogitation as a Body that was devoid of Light and Heat may be Kindled into Fire and Flame this seems to argue too much Ignorance of the Doctrine of Bodies in men otherwise Learned and Ingenious The best Naturalists having already concluded That Fire and Flame is nothing but such a Motion of the Insensible Parts of a Body as whereby they are violently agitated and many times dissipated and scattered from each other begetting in the mean time tâ—â—se Phancies of Light and Heat in Animals Now there is no difficulty at all in conceiving that the Insensible Particles of a Body which were before quiescent may be put into Motion this being nothing but a New Modification of them and no Entity reâ—lly distinct from the Substance of Body as Life Sense and Cogitation are There is nothing in Fire and Flame or a Kindled Body different from other Bodies but only the Motion or Mechanism and Phancie of it And therefore it is but a crude conceit which the Atheists and Corporealists of former times have been always so fond of That Souls are nothing but Firie or Flammeous Bodies For though Heat in the Bodies of Animals be a Necessary Instrument for Soul and Life to act by in them yet it is a thing really distinct from Life and a Red hot Iron hath not therefore any nearer approximation to Life than it had before nor the Flame of a Candle than the extinguisht Snuff or Tallow of it the difference between them being only in the Agitation of the Insensible Parts We might also add that according to this Hypothesis the Souls of Animals could not be Numerically the same throughout the whole space of their Lives Since that Fire that needs a Pabulum to prey upon doth not continue alwaies one and the same Numerical Substance The Soul of a new born Animal could be no more the same with the Soul of that Animal several years after than the Flame of a new lighted Candle is the same with that Flame that twinkles last in the Socket Which indeed are no more the same than a River or Stream is the same at several distances of time Which Reason may be also extended further to prove the Soul to be no Body at all since the Bodies of all Animals are in a perpetual Flux XXXVIII We have now sufficiently performed our first Task which was to show from the Origin of the Atomical Physiology that the Doctrine of Incorporeal Substance must needs spring up together with it We shall in the next place make it manifest that the Inward Constitution of this Philosophy is also such that whosoever really entertains it and rightly understands it must of necessity admit Incorporeal Substance likewise First therefore the Atomical Hypothesis allowing nothing to Body but what is either included in the Idaea of a thing Impenetrably extended or can clearly be conceived to be a Mode of it as more or less Magnitude with Divisibility Figure Site Motion and Rest together with the Results of their several Combinations cannot possibly make Life and Cogitation to be Qualities of Body since they are neither contained in those things before mentioned nor can result from any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Conjugations of them Wherefore it must needs be granted that Life and Cogitation are the Attributes of another Substance distinct from Body or Incorporeal Again since according to the Tenour of this Physiology Body hath no other Action belonging to it but that of Local Motion which Local Motion as such is Essentially Heterokinesie that which never springs originally from the thing it self moving but alwaies from the Action of some other Agent upon it That is since no Body could ever move it self it follows undeniably that there must be something else in the World besides Body or else there could never have been any Motion in it Of which we shall speak more afterwards Moreover according to this Philosophy the Corporeal Phaenomena themselves cannot be salved by Mechanism alone without Phancie Now Phancie is no Mode of Body and therefore must needs be a Mode of some other kind of Being in our selves that is Cogitative and Incorporeal Furthermore it is evident from the Principles of this Philosophy that Sense it self is not a mere Corporeal Passion from Bodies without in that it supposeth that there is nothing really in Bodies like to those Phantastick Idaea's that we have of Sensible things as of Hot and Cold Red and Green Bitter and Sweet and the like which therefore must needs owe their Being to some Activity of the Soul it self and this is all one as to make it Incorporeal Lastly from this Philosophy it is also manifest that Sense is not the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Truth concerning Bodies themselves it confidently pronouncing that those supposed Qualities of Bodies represented such by Sense are merely Phantastical things from whence it plainly follows that there is something in us superiour to Sense which judges of it detects its Phantastry and condemns its Imposture and determines what really is and is not in Bodies without us which must needs be a higher Self-active Vigour of the Mind that will plainly speak it to be Incorporeal XXXIX And now this Atomical Physiology of the Ancients seems to have two Advantages or Preeminences belonging to it the first whereof is this That it renders the Corporeal World Intelligible to us since Mechanism is a thing that we can clearly understand and we cannot clearly and distinctly conceive any thing in Bodies else To say that this or that is done by a Form or Quality is nothing else but to say that it is done we know not how or which is yet more absurd to make our very Ignorance of the Cause disguised under those Terms of Forms and Qualities to be it self the Cause of the Effect Moreover Hot and Cold Red and Green Bitter and Sweet c. formally considered may be clearly conceived by us as different Phancies and Vital Passions in us occasioned by different Motions made from the objects without upon our Nerves but they can never be clearly understood as absolute Qualities in the Bodies themselves really distinct from their Mechanical Dispositions nor is there indeed any more reason why they should be thought such than that when a Man is pricked with a Pin or wounded with a Sword the Pain which he feels should be thought to be an Absolute Qualitie in the Pin or Sword So long as our Sensible Idaea's are taken either for Substantial Forms or Qualities in Bodies without us really distinct from the Substance of the Matter so long are they perfectly unintelligible by us For which Cause Timaeus Locrus Philosophizing as it seemeth after this manner did consentaneously thereunto determine
That the first Elements Fire water Air and Earth were all made by Nature and Chance without any Art or Method and then that the bodies of the Sun Moon and Stars and the whole Heavens were afterward made out of those Elements as devoid of all manner of Life and only fortuitously moved and mingled together and lastly that the whole Mundane System together with the orderly Seasons of the year as also Plants Animals and Men did arise after the same manner from the mere Fortuitous Motion of sensless and stupid Matter In the very same manner does Plato state this Controversie again betwixt Theists and Atheists in his Philebus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whether shall we say O Protarchus that this whole Vniverse is dispensed ond ordered by a mere Irrational Temerarious and Fortuitous Principle and so as it happens or contrariwise as our fore-fathers have instructed us that Mind and a certain Wonderful Wisdom did at first frame and does still govern all things Wherefore we conclude that Plato took no notice of any other Form of Atheism as then set on foot than such as derives all things from a mere Fortuitous Principle from Nature and Chance that is the unguided Motion of Matter without any Plastick Artificialness or Methodicalness either in the whole Universe or the parts of it But because this kind of Atheism which derives all things from a mere Fortuitous Nature had been managed two manner of ways by Democritus in the way of Atoms and by Anaximander and others in the way of Forms and Qualities of which we are to speak in the next place therefore the Atheism which Plato opposes was either the Democritick or the Anaximandrian Atheism or else which is most probable both of them together IX It is hardly imaginable that there should be no Philosophick Atheists in the world before Democritus and Leucippus Plato long since concluded that there have been Atheists more or less in every Age when he bespeaks his young Atheist after this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The full sence whereof seems to be this Neither you my Son nor your friends Democritus Leucippus and Protagoras are the first who have entertained this Opinion concerning the Gods but there have been always some more or less sick of this Atheistick Disease Wherefore we shall now make a diligent search and enquiry to see if we can find any other Philosophers who Atheized before Democritus and Leucippus as also what Form of Atheism they entertained Aristotle in his Metaphysicks speaking of the Quaternio of Causes affirms that many of those who first Philosophized assigned only a Material Cause of the whole Mundane System without either Intending or Efficient Cause The reason whereof he intimates to have been this because they asserted Matter to be the only Substance and that whatsoever else was in the World besides the substance or bulk of Matter were all nothing else but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 different Passions and Affections Accidents and Qualities of Matter that were all Generated out of it and Corruptible again into it the Substance of Matter always remaining the same neither Generated nor Corrupted but from Eternity unmade Aristotle's words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Most of those who first philosophized took notice of no other Principle of things in the Vniverse than what is to be referred to the Material Cause for that out of which all things are and out of which they are first made and into which they are all at last corrupted and resolved the Substance always remaining the same and being changed only in its Passions and Qualities This they concluded to be the first Original and Principle of all things X. But the meaning of these old Material Philosophers will be better understood by those Exceptions which Aristotle makes against them which are Two First that because they acknowledged no other Substance besides Matter that might be an Active Principle in the Universe it was not possible for them to give any account of the Original of Motion and Action 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Though all Generation be made never so much out of something as the Matter yet the question still is by what means this cometh to pass and what is the Active Cause which produceth it because the Subject-matter cannot change it self As for example neither Timber nor Brass is the cause that either of them are changed for Timber alone does not make a Bed nor Brass a Statue but there must be something else as the Cause of the Change and to enquire after this is to enquire after another Principle besides Matter which we would call that from whence Motion springs In which words Aristotle intimates that these old Material Philosopers shuffled in Motion and Action into the World unaccountably or without a Cause forasmuch as they acknowledged no other Principle of Things besides Passive Matter which could never move change or alter it self XI And Aristotle's second Exception against these old Material Philosophers is this that since there could be no Intending Causality in Sensless and Stupid Matter which they made to be the only Principle of all things they were not able to assign 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 any Cause of Well and Fit and so could give no account of the Regular and Orderly Frame of this Mundane System 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That things partly are so well in the World and partly are made so well cannot be imputed either to Earth or Water or any other sensless Body much less is it reasonable to attribute so noble and Excellent an Effect as this to mere Chance or Fortune Where Aristotle again intimates that as these Material Philosophers shuffled in Motion into the world without a Cause so likewise they must needs suppose this Motion to be altogether Fortuitous and Unguided and thereby in a manner make Fortune which is nothing but the absence or defect of an Intending Cause to supply the room both of the Active and Intending Cause that is Efficient and Final Whereupon Aristotle subjoyns a Commendation of Anaxagoras as the first of the Ionick Philosophers who introduced Mind or Intellect for a Principle in the Universe that in this respect he alone seemed to be sober and in his wits comparatively with those others that went before him who talked so idly and Atheistically For Anaxagoras his Principle was such saith Aristotle as was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at once a cause of Motion and also of Well and Fit of all the Regularity Aptitude Pulchritude and Order that is in the whole Universe And thus it seems Anaxagoras himself had determined 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Anaxagoras saith that Mind is the only Cause of Right and Well this being proper to Mind to aim at Ends and Good and to order one thing Fitly for the sake of another Whence it was that Anaxagoras concluded Good also as well as Mind to have been a Principle of the Universe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
God but an Energetick and Effectual Principle and the Plastick Nature the true and proper Fate of Matter or the Corporeal World What Magick is and that Nature which acts Fatally acts also Magically and Sympathetically 19. That the Plastick Nature though it be the Divine Art and Fate yet for all that it it neither God nor Goddess but a Low and Imperfect Creature it acting Artificially and Rationally no otherwise than compounded Forms of Letters when printing Coherent Philosophick Sence nor for Ends than a Saw or Hatchet in the hands of a skilful Mechanick The Plastick and Vegetative Life of Nature the Lowest of all Lives and Inferiour to the Sensitive A Higher Providence than that of the Plastick Nature governing the Corporeal World it self 20. Notwithstanding which forasmuch as the Plastick Nature is a Life it must needs be Incorporeal One and the same thing having in it an entire Model and Platform and acting upon several distant parts of Matter at once coherently cannot be Corporeal and though Aristotle no where declare whether his Nature be Corporeal or Incorporeal which he neither doth clearly concerning the Rational Soul and his Followers conclude it to be Corporeal yet according to the very Principles of that Philosophy it must needs be otherwise 21. The Plastick Nature being Incorporeal must either be a Lower Power lodged in Souls that are also Conscious Sensitive or Rational or else a distinct Substantial Life by it self and Inferiour Kind of Soul How the Platonists complicate both these together with Aristotle's agreeable Determination that Nature is either Part of a Soul or not without Soul 22. The Plastick Nature as to Animals according to Aristotle a Part or Lower Power of their Respective Souls That the Phaenomena prove a Plastick Nature or Archeus in Animals to make which a distinct thing from the Soul is to multiply Entities without necessity The Soul endued with a Plastick Power the chief Formatrix of its own Body the Contribution of certain other Causes not excluded 23. That besides that Plastick Principle in Particular Animals forming them as so many Little Worlds there is a General Plastick Nature in the whole Corporeal Vniverse which likewise according to Aristotle is either a Part and Lower Power of a Conscious Mundane Soul or else something depending on it 24. That no less according to Aristotle than Plato and Socrates our selves partake of Life from the Life of the Vniverse as well as we do of Heat and Cold from the Heat and Cold of the Vniverse from whence it appears that Aristotle also held the worlds Animation with further Vndeniable Proof thereof An Answer to Two the most considerable places of that Philosopher that seem to imply the contrary That Aristotles First Immoveable Mover was no Soul but a Perfect Intellect Abstract from Matter but that he supposed this to move only as a Final Cause or as being Loved and besides it a Mundane Soul and Plastick Nature to move the Heavens Efficiently Neither Aristotle's Nature nor his Mundane Soul the Supreme Deity However though there be no such Mundane Soul as both Plato and Aristotle conceived yet notwithstanding there may be a Plastick Nature depending upon a Higher Intellectual Principle 25. No Impossibility of some other Particular Plastick Principles and though it be not reasonable to think that every Plant Herb and Pile of Grass hath a Plastick or Vegetative Soul of its own nor that the Earth is an Animal yet that there may possibly be One Plastick Inconscious Nature in the whole Terraqueous Globe by which Vegetables may be severally organized and framed and all things performed which transcend the Power of Fortuitous Mechanism 26. Our Second Vndertaking which was to shew how grosly those Atheists who acknowledge this Plastick Nature Misunderstand it and Abuse the Notion to make a Counterfeit God-almighty or Numen of it to the exclusion of the True Deity First in their supposing that to be the First and Highest Principle of the Vniverse which is the Last and lowest of all Lives a thing as Essentially Derivative from and Dependent upon a Higher Intellectual Principle as the Eccho on the Original Voice 27. Secondly in their making Sense and Reason in Animals to Emerge out of a Sensless Life of Nature by the mere Modification and Organization of Matter That no Duplication of Corporeal Organs can ever make One Single Inconscious Life to advance into Redoubled Consciousness and Self-enjoyment 28. Thirdly in attributing Perfect Knowledge and Vnderstanding to this Life of Nature which yet themselves suppose to be devoid of all Animal Sense and Consciousness 29. Lastly in making the Plastick Life of Nature to be merely Corporeal the Hylozoists contending that it is but an Inadequate Conception of Body as the only Substance and fondly dreaming that the Vulgar Notion of God is nothing but such an Inadequate Conception of the Matter of the Whole Vniverse mistaken for a Complete and Entire Substance by it self the Cause of all things CHAP. IV. The Idea of God declared in way of Answer to the First Atheistick Argument The Grand Prejudice against the Naturality of this Idea as Essentially including Unity or Onelyness in it from the Pagan Polytheism removed Proved that the Intelligent Pagans generally acknowledged One Supreme Deity What their Polytheism and Idolatry was with some Accompt of Christianity 1. The either Stupid Insensibility or Gross Impudence of Atheists in denying the word GOD to have any Signification or that there is any other Idea answering to it besides the mere Phantasm of the Sound The Disease called by the Philosopher 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Petrification or Dead Insensibility of the Mind 2. That the Atheists themselves must needs have an Idea of God in their minds or otherwise when they deny his Existence they should deny the Existence of Nothing And that they have also the same Idea of him with Theists they denying the very same thing which the others affirm 3. A Lemma or Preparatory Proposition to the Idea of God That though some things be Made or Generated yet it is not possible that all things should be Made but something must of Necessity Exist of it self from Eternity Vnmade and be the Cause of those other things that are Made 4. The Two most Opposite Opinions concerning that which was Self-existent from Eternity or Vnmade and the Cause of all other things Made One That it was nothing but Sensless Matter the most Imperfect of all things The Other That it was something Most Perfect and therefore Consciously Intellectual The Asserters of this latter Opinion Theists in a strict and proper sence of the former Atheists So that the Idea of God in general is a Perfect Consciously Vnderstanding Being or Mind Self-existent from Eternity and the Cause of all other things 5. Observed That the Atheists who deny a God according to the true Idea of him do often Abuse the word calling Sensless Matter by that Name and meaning nothing else thereby but a
First Principle or Self-existent Vnmade thing That according to this Notion of the word God there can be no such thing as an Atheist no man beâ—ng able to perswade himself that all things sprung from Nothing 6. In order to the more punctual Declaration of the Divine Idea the Opinion of those taken notice of who suppose Two Self-existent Vnmade Principles God and Matter and so God not to be the Sole but only the Chief Principle 7. That these are but Imperfect and Mistaken Theists Their Idea of God declared with its Defectivenâ—ss A Latitude in Theism None to be condemned for Absolute Atheists but â—uch as deny an Eternal Vnmade Mind ruling over the matter 8. The most Compendious Idea of God An Absolutely Perfect Being â—hat this includes not only Conscious Intellectuality and Necessary Existence but also Omni-causality Omnipotence and Infinite Power and therâ—fore God the sole Principle of all and Cause of Matter The true Notion of Infinite Power Pagans acknowledged the Divine Omnipotence And that the Atheists supposed Infinite Power to be included in the Idea of God proved from Lucretius 9. That absolute Perfection implies something more than Power and Knowledge A Vaticination in mens minds of a Higher Good than either That God is Better than Knowledge according to Aristotle and that there is Morality in the Nature of God wherein his chief Happiness consisâ—eth This borrowed from Plato who makes the Highest Perfection and Supreme Deity to be Goodness it self above Knowledge and Intellect God and the Supreme Good according to the Scripture Love God no soft or fond Love but an Impartial Law and the Measure of all things That the Atheists supposed Goodness also to be included in the Idea of God The Idea of God more Explicate and Vnfolded A Being absolutely Perfect Infinitely Good Wise and Powerful Necessarily Existent and not only the Framer of the World but also the Cause of all things 10. That this Idea of God Essentially includes Unity or Onelyness in it since there can be but One Supreme One Cause of all things One Omnipotent and One Infinitely Perfect This Vnity or Onelyness of the Deity supposed also by Epicurus and Lucretius who professedly denyed a God according to this Idea 11. The Grand Prejudice against the Naturality of this Idea of God as it Essentially includes Vnity and Solitariety from the Polytheism of all Nations formerly besides the Jewes and of all the wisest men and Philosophers from whence it is inferred that this Idea of God is but Artificial and owes its Original to Laws and Institution An Enquiry to be made concerning the true sence of the Pagan Polytheism That the Objectors take it for granted that the Pagan Polytheists universally asserted Many Self-existent Intellectual Beings and Independent Deities as so many Partial Causes of the World 12. First the Irrationality of this Opinion and its manifest Repugnancy to the Phaenomena which render it less probable to have been the Belief of all the Pagan Polytheists 13. Secondly That no such thing at all appears as that ever any Intelligent Pagans asserted a Multitude of Eternal Vnmade Independent Deities The Hesiodian Gods The Valentinian Aeons The nearest Approach made thereunto by the Manichean Good and Evil Gods This Doctrine not generally asserted by the Greek Philosophers as Plutarch affirmeth Questioned whether the Persian Evil Daemon or Arimanius were a Self-existent Principle Essentially Evil. Aristotle's Confutation and Explosion of Many Principles or Independent Deities Faustus the Manichean his Conceit that the Jews and Christians Paganized in the Opinion of Monarchy with St. Austin's Judgment concerning the Pagans thereupon 14. Concluded that the Pagan Polytheism must be understood according to another Equivocation in the word Gods as used for Created Intellectual Beings superiour to Men that ought to be Religiously Worshipped That the Pagans held both Many Gods and One God as Onatus the Pythagorean declares himself in different Sences Many Inferiour Deities Suberdinate to One Supreme 15. Further Evidence of this that the Intelligent Pagan Polytheists held only a Plurality of Inferiour Deities Subordinate to one Supreme First because after the Emersion of Christianity and its contest with Paganism when occasion was offered not only no Pagan asserted a Multiplicity of Independent Deities but also all Vniversally disclaim'd it and professed to acknowledge One Supreme God 16. That this was no Refinement or Interpolation of Paganism as might possibly be suspected but that the Doctrine of the most Ancient Pagan Theologers and greatest Promoters of Polytheism was agreeable hereunto which will be proved not from suspected Writings as of Trismegist and the Sibyls but such as are Indubitate First That Zoroaster the chief Promoter of Polytheism in the Eastern Parts acknowledged one Supreme Deity the Maker of the World proved from Eubulus in Porphyry besides his own words cited by Eusebius 17. That Orpheus commonly called by the Greeks The Theologer and the Father of the Grecanick Polytheism clearly asserted one Supreme Deity proved by his own words out of Pagan Records 18. That the Aegyptians themselves the most Polytheistical of all Nations had an acknowledgement amongst them of one Supreme Deity 19. That the Poets who were the greatest Depravers of the Pagan Theology and by their Fables of the Gods made it look more Aristocratically did themselves notwithstanding acknowledge a Monarchy one Prince and Father of Gods That famous Passage of Sophocles not to be suspected though not found in any of these Tragedies now extant 20. That all the Pagan Philosophers who were Theists universally asserted a Mundane Monarchy Pythagoras as much a Polytheist as any and yet his First Principle of Things as well as Numbers a Monad or Unity Anaxagoras his One Mind ordering all things for Good Xenophanes his One and All and his One God the Greatest among the Gods 21. Parmenides his Supreme God One Immoveable Empedocles his both Many Gods Junior to Friendship and Contention and his One God called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Senior to them Zeno Eleates his Demonstration of One God in Aristotle 22. Philolaus his Prince and Governour of all God always One Euclides Megarensis his God called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One the Very Good Timaeus Locrus his Mind and Good above the Soul of the World Antisthenes his One Natural God Onatus his Corypheus 23. Generally believed and true that Socrates acknowledged One Supreme God but that he disclaimed all the Inferiour Gods of the Pagans a Vulgar Error Plato also a Polytheist and that Passage which some lay so great stress upon That he was serious when he began his Epistles with God but when with Gods jocular Spurious and Counterfeit and yet he was notwithstanding an undoubted Monotheist also in another sence an Asserter of One God over all of a Maker of the World of a First God of a Greatest of the Gods The First Hypostasis of the Platonick Trinity properly the King of all things for whose sake are all things Tâ—e Father of the Cause and
it is impossible that any man in his Wits should believe a Multiplicity of Gods according to that Idea of God before declared that is a Multiplicity of Supreme Omnipotent or Infinitely Powerful Beings it is certain that the Pagan Polytheism and Multiplicity of Gods must be understood according to some other Notion of the Word Gods or some Equivocation in the use of it It hath been already observed that there were sometime amongst the Pagans such who meaning nothing else by Gods but Vnderstanding Beings Superiour to men did suppose a Multitude of such Deities which yet they conceived to be all as well as Men Native and Mortal Generated successively out of Matter and Corrupted again into it as Democritus his Idols were But these Theogonists who thus Generated all things whatsoever and therefore the Gods themselves universally out of Night and Chaos the Ocean or Fluid Matter notwithstanding their Using the Name Gods are plainly condemned both by Aristotle and Plato for down-right Atheists they making Sensless Matter the Only Self-existent thing and the Original of all things Wherefore there may be another Notion of the Word Gods as taken for Vnderstanding Beings Superiour to Men that are not only Immortal but also Self-existent and Vnmade and indeed the Assertors of a Multiplicity of such Gods as these though they cannot be accounted Theists in a strict and proper sence according to that Idea of God before declared yet they are not vulgarly reputed Atheists neither but look'd upon as a kind of Middle thing betwixt Both and commonly called Polytheists The reason whereof seems to be this because it is generally apprehended to be Essential to Atheism to make Sensless Matter the Sole Original of all things and consequently to suppose all Conscious Intellectual Beings to be Made or Generated wherefore they who on the contrary assert not One but Many Understanding Beings Vnmade and Self-existent must needs be look'd upon as those who of the Two approach nearer to Theism than to Atheism and so deserve rather to be called Polytheists than Atheists And there is no Question to be made but that the Urgers of the forementioned Objection against that Idea of God which includes Oneliness and Singularity in it from the Pagan Polytheism or Multiplicity of Gods take it for granted that this is to be understood of Many Vnmade Self-existent Deities Independent upon one Supreme that are so many First Principles in the Universe and Partial Causes of the World And certainly if it could be made to appear that the Pagan Polytheists did universally acknowledge such a Multiplicity of Vnmade Self-existent Deities then the Argument fetch'd from thence against the Naturality of that Idea of God proposed Essentially including Singularity in it might seem to have no small Force or Validity in it XII But First this Opinion of Many Self-existent Deities Independent upon One Supreme is both Very Irrational in it self and also plainly Repugnant to the Phaenomena We say First it is Irrational in it self because Self-existence and Necessary Existence being Essential to a Perfect Being and to nothing else it must needs be very Irrational and Absurd to suppose a Multitude of Imperfect Understanding Beings Self-existent and no Perfect One. Moreover if Imperfect Understanding Beings were imagined to Exist of themselves from Eternity there could not possibly be any reason given why just so many of them should exist and neither More nor Less there being indeed no reason why any at all should But if it be supposed that these Many Self-existent Deities happened only to Exist thus from Eternity and their Existence notwithstanding was not Necessary but Contingent the Consequence hereof will be that they might as well happen again to cease to be and so could not be Incorruptible Again if any One Imperfect Being whatsoever could exist of it self from Eternity then all might as well do so not only Matter but also the Souls of Men and other Animals and consequently there could be No Creation by any Deity nor those suposed Deities therefore deserve that Name Lastly we might also add that there could not be a Multitude of Intellectual Beings Self-existent because it is a thing which may be proved by Reason that all Imperfect Understanding Beings or Minds do partake of One Perfect Mind and suppose also Omnipotence or Infinite Power were it not that this is a Consideration too remote from Vulgar Apprehension and therefore not so fit to be urged in this place Again as this Opinion of Many Self-existent Deities is Irrational in it self so is it likewise plainly Repugnant to the Phaenomena of the World In which as Macrobius writes Omnia sunt connexa all things conspire together into One Harmony and are carried on Peaceably and Quietly Constantly and Eavenly without any Tumult or Hurly-burly Confusion or Disorder or the least appearance of Schism and Faction which could not possibly be supposed were the World Made and Governed by a Rabble of Self-existent Deities Coordinate and Independent upon One Supreme Wherefore this kind of Polytheism was obiter thus confuted by Origen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 How much better is it agreably to what we see in the harmonious System of the World to worship one only Maker of the World which is one and conspiring throughout with its whole self and therefore could not be made by many Artificers as neither be conteined by Many Souls Moving the Whole Heaven Now since this Opinion is both Irrational in it self and Repugnant to the Phaenomena there is the less Probability that it should have been received and entertained by all the more Intelligent Pagans XIII Who that they did not thus Universally look upon all their Gods as so many Vnmade Self-existent Beings is unquestionably manifest from hence because ever since Hesiod's and Homer's time at least the Greekish Pagans generally acknowledged a Theogonia a Generation and Temporary Production of the Gods which yet is not to be understood Universally neither forasmuch as he is no Theist who does not acknowledge some Self-existent Deity Concerning this Theogonia Herodotus writeth after this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whence every one of the Gods was Generated or whether they all of them ever were and what are their forms is a thing that was not known till very lately for Hesiod and Homer were as I suppose not above four hundred years my Seniors And these were they who introduced the Theogonia among the Greeks and gave the Gods their several Names that is settled the Pagan Theology Now if before Hesiod's and Homer's time it were a thing not known or determined amongst the Greeks whether their Gods were Generated or all of them Existed from Eternity then it was not Universally concluded by them that they were all Vnmade and Self-existent And though perhaps some might in those ancient times believe one way and some another concerning the Generation and Eternity of their Gods yet it does not follow that they who thought them to be all
Eternal must therefore needs suppose them to be also Vnmade or Self-existent For Aristotle who asserted the Eternity of the World and consequently also of those Gods of his the Heavenly Bodie did not for all that suppose them to be Self-existent or First Principles but all to depend upon One Principle or Original Deity And indeed the true meaning of that Question in Herodotus Whether the Gods were Generated or Existed all of them from Eternity is as we suppose really no other than that of Plato's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whether the World were Made or Vnmade and whether it had a Temporary beginning or existed such as it is from Eternity which will be more fully declared afterwards But ever since Hesiod's and Homer's time that the Theogonia or Generation of the Gods was settled and generally believed amongst the Greeks it is certain that they could not possibly think all their Gods Eternal and therefore much less Vnmade and Self-existent But though we have thus clearly proved that all the Pagan Gods were not Universally accounted by them so many Vnmade Self-existent Deities they acknowledging a Theogonia or a Generation of Gods yet it may be suspected notwithstanding that they might suppose a Multitude of them also and not only One to have been Vnmade from Eternity and Self-existent Wherefore we add in the next place that no such thing does at all appear neither as that the Pagans or any others did ever publickly or professedly assert a Multitude of Vnmade Self-existent Deities For First it is plain concerning the Hesiodian Gods which were all the Gods of the Greekish Pagans that either there was but One of them only Self-existent or else None at all Because Hesiods Gods were either all of them derived from Chaos or the Floting Water Love it self being Generated likewise out of it according to that Aristophanick Tradition before mentioned or else Love was supposed to be a distinct Principle from Chaos namely the Active Principle of the Universe from whence together with Chaos all the Theogonia and Cosmogonia was derived Now if the Former of these were true that Hesiod supposed all his Gods Universally to have been Generated and sprung Originally from Chaos or the Ocean then it is plain that notwithstanding all that Rabble of Gods muster'd up by him he could be no other than One of those Atheistiâ—k Theogonists beforementioned and really acknowledged no God at all according to the True Idea of him he being not a Theist who admits of no Self-existent Deity But if the Latter be true that Hesiod supposed Love to be a Principle distinct from Chaos namely the Active Principle of the Universe and derived all his other Gods from thence he was then a right Paganick Theist such as acknowledged indeed Many Gods but only One of them Vnmade and Self-existent all the rest being Generated or Created by that One. Indeed it appears from those Passages of Aristotle before cited by us that that Philosopher had been sometimes divided in his Judgment concerning Hesiod where he should 〈◊〉 rank him whether among the Atheists or the Theists For in his Book de Coelo he ranks him amongst those who made all things to be Generated and Corrupted besides the Bare Substance of the Matter that is amongst the Absolute Atheists and look'd upon him as a Ringleader of them but in his Metaphysicks upon further thoughts suspects that many of those who made Love the Châ—â—fest of the Gods were Theists they supposing it to be a First Principle in the Universe or the Active Cause of things and that not only Parmenides but also Hesiod was such Which Latter Opinion of his is by far the more probable and therefore embraced by Plutarch who somewhere determines Hesiod to have asserted One 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Vnmade Deity as also by the ancient Scholiastâ—â—â— upon him writ thus that Hesiods Love was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Heavenly Love which is also God that other Love that was born of Venus being Junior But Joannes Diaconus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By Love here saith he we must not understand Venus her Son whose Mother was as yet Vnborn but another more ancient Love which I take to be the Active Cause or Principle of Motion Naturally inserted into things Where though he do not seem to suppose this Love to be God himself yet he conceives it to be an Active Principle in the Universe derived from God and not from Matter But this Opinion will be further confirmed afterward The next considerable appearance of a Multitude of Self-existent Deities seems to be in the Valentinian Thirty Gods and Aeons which have been taken by some for such but it is certain that these were all of them save One Generated they being derived by that Phantastick Devizer of them from One Self-originated Deity called Bythus For thus Epiphanius informs us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This Valentinus would also introduce Thirty Gods and Aeons and Heavens the first of which is Bythus he meaning thereby an Unfathomable Depth and Profundity and therefore this Bythus was also called by him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Highest and Ineffable Father We do indeed acknowledge that there have been some who have really asserted a Duplicity of Gods in the sence declared that is of Animalish or Perceptive Beings Self-existent One as the Principle of Good and the other of Evil. And this Ditheism of theirs seems to be the nearest approch that was ever really made to Polytheism Unless we should here give heed to Plutarch who seems to make the ancient Persians besides their Two Gods the Good and the Evil or Oromasdes and Arimanius to have asserted also a Third Middle Deity called by them Mithras or to some Ecclesiastick Writers who impute a Trinity of Gods to Marcion though Tertullian be yet more Liberal and encrease the Number to an Ennead For those that were commonly called Tritheists being but mistaken Christians and Trinitarians fall not under this Consideration Now as for that forementioned Ditheism or Opinion of Two Gods a Good and an Evil one it is evident that its Original sprung from nothing else but First a Firm Perswasion of the Essential Goodness of the Deity together with a Conceit that the Evil that is in the world was altogether Inconsistent and Vnreconcilable with the same and that therefore for the salving of this Phenomenon it was absolutely necessary to suppose another Animalish Principle Self-existent or an Evil God Wherefore as these Ditheists as to all that which is Good in the World held a Monarchy or one Sole Principle and Original so it is plain that had it not heen for this business of Evil which they conceived could not be salved any other way they would never have asserted any more Principles or Gods than One. The chiefest and most eminent Assertors of which Ditheistick Doctrine of Two Self-existent Animalish Principles in the Universe a Good God and an Evil Daemon were the Marcionites and the
Manicheans both of which though they made some slight Pretences to Christianity yet were not by Christians owned for such But it is certain that besides these and before them too some of the Professed Pagans also entertained the same Opinion that famous Moralist Plutarchus Chaeronensis being an Undoubted Patron of it which in his Book De Iside Osiride he represents with some little difference after this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Generation and Constitution of this World is mixt of contrary Powers or Principles the one Good the other Evil yet so as that they are not both of equal force but the Better of them more prevalent notwithstanding standing which it is also absolutely impossible for the Worser Power or Principle to be ever Vtterly destroyed much of it being always intermingled in the Soul and much in the Body of the Vniverse there perpetually tugging against the Better Principle Indeed learned men of later times have for the most part look'd upon Plutarch here but either as a bare Relater of the Opinion of other Philosophers or else as a Follower only and not a Leader in it Notwithstanding which it is evident that Plutarch was himself heartily Engaged in this Opinion he discovering no small fondnâ—ss for it in sundry of his other Writings as for Example in his Platonick Questions where he thus declares himself concerning it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Or else that which is often affirmed by us is true that a Mad Irrational soul and an unformed disorderly Body did coexist with one another from Eternity neither of them having any Generation or Beginning And in his Timaean Psychogonia he does at large industriosly maintain the same there and elsewhere endeavouring to establish this Doctrine as much as possibly he could upon Rational Foundations As First that Nothing can be Made or Produced without a Cause and therefore there must of necessity be some Cause of Evil also and that a Positive one too he representing the Opinion of those as very ridiculous who would make the Nature of Evil to be but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Accidental Appendix to the World and all that Evil which is in it to have come in only by the by and by Consequence without any Positive Cause Secondly that God being Essentially Good could not possibly be the Cause of Evil where he highly applauds Plato for removing God to the greatest distance imaginable from being the Cause of Evil. Thirdly that as God could not so neither could 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Matter in it self devoid of all form and Quality be the Cause of Evil noting this to have been the Subterfuge of the Stoicks Upon which account he often condemns them but uncertainly sometimes as such who affigned No Cause at all of Evils and sometimes again as those who made God the Cause of them For in his Psychogonia he concludes that unless we acknowledge a Substantial Evil Principle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Stoical Difficulties will of necessity overtake and involve us who introduce Euil into the World from Nothing or Without a Cause since neither that which is Essentially Good as God nor yet that which is devoid of all Quality as Matter could possibly give being or Generation to it But in his Book against the Stoicks he accuses them as those who made God Essentially Good the Cause of Evil. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Themselves make God being Good the Principle and cause of Evil since Matter which is devoid of Quality and recieves all its Differences from the Active Principle that moves and forms it could not possibly be the Cause thereof Wherefore Evil must of necessity eithercome from Nothing or else it must come from the Active and Moving Principle which is God Now from all these Premises joyned together Plutarch concludes that the Phaenomenon of Evil could no otherwise possibly be salved than by supposing a Substantial Principle for it and a certain Irrational and Maleficent Soul or Daemon Vnmade and Coexisting with God and Matter from Eternity to have been the Cause thereof And accordingly he resolves that as whatsoever is Good in the Soul and Body of the Vniverse and likewise in the Souls of Men and Daemons is to be ascribed to God as its only Original so whatsoever is Evil Irregular and Disorderly in them ought to be imputed to this other Substantial Principle a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Irrational and Maleficent Soul or Daemon which insinuating it sâ—lf every where throughout the World is all along intermingled with the Better Principle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So that neither the Soul of the Vniverse nor that of Men and Daemons was wholly the Workmanship of God but the Lower Brutish and Disorderly part of them the Effect of the Evil Principle But besides all this it is evident that Plutarch was also strongly possessed with a Conceit that nothing Substantial could be Created no not by Divine Power out of Nothing Preexisting and therefore that all the Substance of whatsoever is in the World did Exist from Eternity Vnmade so that God was only the Orderer or the Methodizer and Harmonizer thereof Wherefore as he concluded that the Corporeal World was not Created by God out of Nothing as to the Substance of it but only the Preexisting Matter which before moved Disorderly was brought into this Regular Order and Harmony by him In like manner he resolved that the Soul of the World for such a thing is always supposed by him was not made by God out of Nothing neither nor out of any thing Inanimate and Soulless Preexisting but out of a Preexisting Disorderly Soul was brought into an Orderly and Regular Frame 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. There was Vnformed Matter before this Orderly World was made which Matter was not Incorporeal nor Vnmoved or Inanimate but Body discomposed and acted by a Furious and Irrational Mover the Deformity whereof was the Disharmony of a Soul in it devoid of Reason For God neither made Body out of that which was No-Body nor Soul out of No-soul But as the Musician who neither makes Voice nor Motion does by ordering of them notwithstanding produce Harmony so God though he neither made the Tangible and Resisting Substance of Body nor the Phantastick and Self-moving Power of Soul yet taking both those Principles preexisting the one of which was Dark and Obscure the other Turbulent and Irrational and orderly disposing and Harmonizing of them he did by that means produce this most beautiful and perfect Animal of the World And further to the same purpose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God was not the Cause or Maker of Body simply that is neither of Bulk nor Matter but only of that Symmetry and Pulchritude which is in Body and that likeness which it hath to himself Which same ought to be concluded also concerning the Soul of the World that the Substance of it was not made by God neither nor yet that it was
made by such a Cause as this if it were Made and that it is maintained by such a Cause than that Mortal Animals should be so which yet is a thing more generally acknowledged Now it was before declared that Aristotle's Artificial Nature was nothing but the mere Executioner or Opificer of a Perfect Mind that is of the Deity which Two therefore he sometimes joyns together in the Cosmopoeia affirming that Mind and Nature that is God and Nature were the Cause of this Universe And now we see plainly that though there was a Real Controversie amongst the Pagan Theologers especially from Aristotle's time downward concerning the Cosmogonia and Theogonia according to the Stricter notion of those words the Temporary Generation or Production of the World and Inferior Gods or whether they had any Beginning or no yet was there no Controversie at all concerning the Self-existency of them but it was Universally agreed upon amongst them That the World and the Inferior Gods however supposed by some to have existed from Eternity yet were nevertheless all derived from one Sole Self-existent Deity as their Cause 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being either Eradiated or Produced from God Wherefore it is observable that these Pagan Theists who asserted the Worlds Eternity did themselves distinguish concerning the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orium Natum Factum as that which was Equivocal and though in one sence of it they denied that the World and Inferior Gods were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet notwithstanding did they in another sence clearly affirm the same For the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say they strictly and properly taken is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which in respect of time passed out of Non-existence into Being or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which being not before afterwards was Nevertheless they acknowledge that in a larger sence this Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be taken also for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which doth any way depend upon a Superior Being as its Cause And there must needs be the same Equivocation in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that this in like manner may be taken also either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for that which is Ingenerate in respect of Time as having no Temporary Beginning or else for that which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ingenerate or Vnproduced from any Cause in which latter sence that word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Vnmade is of equal force and extent with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which is Self-subsistent or Selforiginated and accordingly it was used by those Pagan Theists who concluded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. That Matter was Vnmade that is not only existed from Eternity without Beginning but also was Self-existent and Independent upon any Superior Cause Now as to the Former of these two sences of those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Generality of the ancient Pagans and together with them Plato affirmed the World and all the Inferior Gods to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to have been Made in Time or to have had a Beginning for whatever the Latter Platonists pretend this was undoubtedly Plato's Notion of that word and no other when he concluded the World to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 forasmuch as himself expresly opposes it to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which is Eternal But on the contrary Aristotle and the Later Platonists determined the World and all the Inferior Gods to be in this sence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as had no Temporary Beginning but were from Eternity However according to the later Sence of those words all the Pagan Theologers agreed together that the World and all the Inferior Gods whether having a Beginning or Existing from Eternity were notwithstanding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 produced or derived from a Superior Cause and that thus there was only One 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One Vnproduced and Self-existent Deity who is said by them to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Superior to a Cause and Older than any Cause he being the Cause of all things besides himself Thus Crantor and his Followers in Proclus zealous Assertors of the Worlds Eternity determined 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the World with all the Inferior Mundane Gods in it notwithstanding their Being from Eternity might be said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is orti or made as being produced from another Cause and not Self-originated or Self-existing In like manner Proclus himself that grand Champion for the Worlds Eternity plainly acknowledged notwithstanding the Generation of the Gods and World in this sence as being produced from a Superior Cause 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We call it the Generations of the Gods meaning thereby not any Temporary Production of them but their Ineffable Procession from a Superior First Cause Thus also Salustius in his Book de Diis Mundo where he contends the World to have been from Eternity or without Beginning yet concludes both it and the other Inferiour Gods to have been made by One Supreme Deity who is called by him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the First God For saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God or the First Cause having the greatest power or being Omnipotent ought therefore to make not only Men and other Animals but also Gods and Demons And accordingly this is the Title of his 13. Chapter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 How Eternal things may be said to be Made or Generated It is true indeed as we have often declared that some of the Pagan Theists asserted God not to be the only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the only Vnmade and Self-existent Being but that Matter also was such nevertheless this Opinion was not so generally received amongst them as is commonly supposed and though some of the ancient Fathers confidently impute it to Plato yet there seems to be no sufficient ground for their so doing and Porphyrius Jamblychus Proclus and other Platonists do not only professedly oppose the same as false but also as that which was dissonant from Plato's Principles Wherefore according to that larger Notion of the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as taken synonymously with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there were Very many of the Pagan Theologers who agreed with Christians in this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That God is the only Ingenerate or Vnmade Being and that his very Essence is Ingenerability or Innascibility all other things even Matter it self being made by him But all the rest of them only a few Ditheists excepted though they supposed Matter to be Self-existent yet did they conclude that there was only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 onely One Vnmade or Vnproduced God and that all their other Gods were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in One sence or other if not as Made in Time yet at least as Produced from a Superiour Cause Nothing now remaineth but onely that we shew how
sunt that is the Lower sort of Mundane Gods and undertaking to shew not that all of these neither but only that many of them were reducible to the Sun as Polyonymous and called by several Names according to his Several Vertues and Effects For what Macrobius his own opinion was concerning the Supreme Deity appeareth plainly from his other Writings particularly this Passage of his Commentary upon Scipio's Dream where the Highest Sphere and Starry Heaven was called Summus Deus the Supreme God Quod hunc Extimum Globum Summum Deum vocavit non ita accipiendum est ut iste Prima Causa Deus ille Omnipotentissimus existimetur cum Globus ipse quod Coelum est Animae sit Fabrica Anima ex Mente processerit Mens ex Deo qui verè Summus est procreata sit Sed Summum quidem dixit ad Caeterorum Ordinem qui subjecti sunt Deum verò quòd non modò Immortale Animal ac Divinum sit plenum inclytae ex illa purissima Mente rationis sed quod virtutes omnes quae illam Primae Omnipotentiam Summitatis sequantur aut ipse faciat aut contineat Ipsum denique Jovem veteres vocaverunt apud Theologos Jupiter est mundi Anima That the Outmost Sphere is here called The Supreme God is not so to be understood as if this were thought to be The First Cause and The Most Omnipotent God of all For this Starry Sphere being but a part of the Heaven was made or produced by Soul Which Soul also proceeded from a Perfect Mind or Intellect and again Mind was begotten from that God who is Truly Supreme But the Highest Sphere is here called the Supreme God only in respect to those Lesser Spheres or Gods that are conteined under it and it is styled a God because it is not only an Immortal and Divine Animal full of Reason derived from that Purest Mind but also because it maketh or conteineth within it self all those Vertues which follow that Omnipotence of the First Summity Lastly this was called by the ancients Jupiter and Jupiter to Theologers is the Soul of the World Wherefore though Macrobius as generally the other Pagans did undoubtedly worship the Sun as a Great God and probably would not stick to call him Jupiter nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 neither in a certain sence Omnipotent or the Governour of all nor perhaps Deum Summum as well as the Starry Heaven was so styled in Scipio's Dream he being the Chief Moderator in this Lower World yet nevertheless it is plain that he was far from thinking the Sun to be Primam Causam or Omnipotentissimum Deum The First Cause or the most Omnipotent God of all He acknowledging above the Sun and Heaven First an Eternal Psyche which was the Maker or Creator of them both and then above this Psyche a Perfect Mind or Intellect and Lastly above that Mind a God who was Verè Summus Truly and Properly Supreme The First Cause and the Most Omnipotent of all Gods Wherein Macrobius plainly Platonized asserting a Trinity of Archical or Divine Hypostases Which same Doctrine is elsewhere also further declared by him after this manner Deus qui Prima Causa est vocatur Vnus omnium quaeque sunt quaeque videntur esse Principium Origo est Hic superabundanti Majestatis faecunditate de se Mentem creavit Haec Mens quae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vocatur qua Patrem inspicit plenam similitudinem servat auctoris Animam verò de se creat posteriora respiciens Rursus Anima partem quam intuetur induitur ac paulatim regrediente respectu in fabricam corporum in corporea ipsa degenerat God who is and is called the First Cause is alone the Fountain and Original of all things that are or seem to be He by his superabundant Fecundity produced from himself Mind which Mind as it looks upward towards its Father bears the perfect resemblance of its Author but as it looked downward produced Soul And this Soul again as to its superiour part resembles that Mind from whence it was begotten but working downwards produced the Corporeal Fabrick and acteth upon Body Besides which the same Macrobius tells us that Summi Principis omnium Dei nullum Simulachrum finxit Antiquitas quia supra Animam Naturam est quo nihil fas est de fabulis pervenire de Diis autem caeteris de Anima non frusta se ad fabulosa convertunt The Pagan Antiquity made no Image at all of the Highest God or Prince of all things because he is above Soul and Nature where it is not lawful for any Fabulosity to be intromitted But as to the other Gods the Soul of the World and those below it they thought it not inconvenient here to make use of Images and Fiction or Fabulosity From all which it plainly appears that neither Macrobius himself nor the Generality of the ancient Pagans according to his apprehension did look upon the Animated Sun as the Absolutely Supreme and Highest Being And perhaps it may not be amiss to suggest here what hath been already observed that the Persians themselves also who of all Pagan Nations have been most charged with this the Worshipping of the Sun as the Supreme Deity under the name of Mithras did notwithstanding if we may believe Eubulus who wrote the History of Mithras at large acknowledge another Invisible Deity Superiour to it and which was the Maker thereof and of the whole World as the True and Proper Mithras Which opinion is also plainly confirmed not only by Herodotus distinguishing their Jupiter from the Sun but also by Xenophon in sundry places as particularly where he speaks of Cyrus his being admonished in a Dream of his aproaching death and thereupon addressing his Devotion by Sacrifices and Prayers first to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Persian Jupiter and then to the Sun and the other Gods 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. He sacrificed to their Country or the Persian Jupiter and to the Sun and to the other Gods upon the Tops of the Mountains as the custom of the Persians is praying after this manner Thou our Country Jupiter that is thou Mithras or Oromasdes and thou Sun and all ye other Gods accept I pray you these my Eucharistick Sacrifices c. And we find also the like Prayer used by Darius in Plutarch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thou our Country Jupiter or Supreme God of the Persians Moreover Herodotus and Curtius record that in the Persian Pomp and Procession there was wont to be drawn a Chariot sacred to Jupiter distinct from that of the Sun But Cyrus his Proclamation in the Book of Esdras putteth all out of doubt since That Lord God of Heaven who is there said to have given Cyrus all the Kinâ—doms of the Earth and commanded him to build Him a House at Jerusalem cannot be understood of the Sun The Ethiopians in Strabo's time may well be
Nevochim to have been the Universal Belief of all the Hebrews or Jews 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 You know that whosoever committeth Idolatry he doth it not as supposing that there is no other God besides that which he worshippeth for it never came into the minds of any Idolaters nor never will that that Statue which is made by them of metal or stone or wood is that very God who created Heaven and Earth but they worship those Statues and Images only as the representation of something which is a Mediator between God and them Moses Albelda the Author of the Book entituled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gnolath Tamid resolves all the Pagan Polytheism and Idolatry into these Two Principles one of which respected God and the other men themselves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Idolaters first argued thus in respect of God that since he was of such transcendent perfection above men it was no possible for men to be united to or have communion with him otherwise than by means of certain Middle Beings or Mediators as it is the manner of Earthly Kings to have petitions conveyed to them by the hands of Mediators Intercessors Secondly they thus argued also in respect of themselves That being corporeal so that they could not apprehend God Abstractly they must needs have something Sensible to excite and stir up their devotion fix their Imagination upon Joseph Albo in the Book called Ikkarim concludes that Ahab and the other Idolatrous Kings of Israel and Judah worshipped other Gods upon those two accounts mentioned by Maimonides no otherwise namely that the Supreme God was honoured by worshipping of his Ministers and that there ought to be certain Middles and Mediators betwixt him and Men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ahab and other Kings of Israel and Judah and even Solomon himself erred in worshipping the Stars upon those two accounts already mentioned out of Maimonides notwithstanding that they believed the Existence of God and his Vnity they partly conceiving that they should honour God in worshipping of his Ministers and partly worshipping them as Mediators betwixt God and themselves And the same Writer determines the meaning of that First Commandment which is to him the Second Thou shalt have no other Gods before my face to be this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thou shalt not set up other Inferiour Gods as Mediators betwixt me and thy sâ—lf or worship them so as thinking to honour me thereby R. David Kimchi upon 2 Kings 17. writeth thus concerning that Israelitish Pâ—iâ—st who by the King of Assyria's command was sent to Samariah to teach the new inhabitanâ—s thereof to worship the God of that Land of whom it is afterwards said that they both feared the Lord and served their Idols 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If he should have altogether prohibited them their Idolatry they would not have hearkned to him that being a thing which all those Eastern people were educated in from their very Infancy insomuch that it was a kind of First Principle to them Wherefore he permitted them to worship all their several Gods as before they had done only he required them to direct the intention of their minds to the God of Israel as the Supreme for those Gods could do them neither Good nor Hurt otherwise than according to his Will and pleasure but they worshipped them to this purpose that they might be MEDIATORS betwixt them and the Creatour In the Book Nitzachon all the Polytheism and Idolatry of the Pagans is reduced to these Three Heads First 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When they worshipped the Ministers of God as thinking to honour him thereby and Secondly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When they worshipped them as Orators and Intecessors for them with God and Lastly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when they worshipped Statues of wood and stone for Memorials of him And though it be true that Isaak Abrabanel upon 2 Kings 17. does enumerate more Species of Pagan Idolatry even to the number of Ten yet are they all of them but so many several Modes of Creature-worship and there is no such thing amongst them to be found as the worshipping of many Unmade Independent Deities as Partial Creators of the World Moreover those Rabbinick Writers commonly interpret certain places of the Scripture to this sence That the Pagan Idolaters did notwithstanding acknowledge One Supreme Deity as that Jeremy 10.7 Who is there that will nâ—t feâ—r thee thâ—u King of Nations For amongst all their wise men and in all their Kingdoms there is none like unto thee though they are become all togâ—ther brutish and their worshipping of stocks is a doctrine of vanity For Maimonides thus glosseth upon those Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As if he should say all the Gentiles know that thou art the only Supreme God but their errour and folly consisteth in this that they think this vanity of worshipping Inferiour Gods to be a thing agreeable to thy will And thus also Kimchi in his Commentaries 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Who will not fear thee It is fit that even the Nations themselves who worship Idols should fear thee for thou art their King and indeed amongst all the wisemen of the Nations and in all their Kingdoms it is generally acknowledged that thâ—re is none like unto thee Neither do they worship the Stars otherwise thâ—n as Mediators betwixt thee and them Their wise men know that aâ— Idâ—l is nothing and though they worship Stars yet do they worship thâ—◠〈◊〉 thy Ministâ—â—s and that they may be Intercessors for them Another place is that Malachi 1.11 which though we read in the Future Tense as a â—rophâ—cy of the Gentiles yet the Jews understand it of that preâ—â—nt time when those words were written From the rising of the Sun to the going down thereof my name is great among the Gentiles and in every place incense is offered to my name and a pure oblation for my name is great amongst the Gentiles saith the Lord of Hosts But you prophane it c. Upon which words R. Solomon glosseth thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Pagan Polytheists and Idolaters Know that there is One God Superiour to all those other Gods and Idols worshipped by them and in every place are there Free-will-offerings brought to my name even amongst the Gentiles And Kimchi agreeth with him herein 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Although the Pagans worshipped the Host of Heaven yet do they confess me to be the first Cause they worshipping them only as in their opinion certain Mediators betwixt me and them Whether either of these two places of Scripture does sufficiently prove what these Jews would have or no yet however is it evident from their interpretations of them that themselves supposed the Pagans to have acknowledged One Supreme Deity and that their Other Gods were all but his Creatures and Ministers Nevertheless there is another place of Scripture which seems to found more to this purpose and accordingly hath been thus interpreted
though Formally Idolaters according to their own false Hypothesis yet were not Materially and Really so whereas these Religious Angel and Saint-Worshippers must be as well Materially as Formally such And here it is observable that these Ancient Fathers made no such Distinction of Religious Worship into Latria as peculiar to the Supreme God it being that whereby he is adored as Self-Existent and Omnipotent or the Creator of all and Dulia such an Inferiour Religious Worship as is communicable to Creatures but concluded of Religious Worship Universally and without Distinction that the due Object of it all was the Creator only and not any Creature Thus Athanasius plainly in his Third Oration 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If the Son or Word of God were to be Worshipped though a Creature because transcending us in glory and dignity then ought every Inferiour Being to Worship what is Superiour to it Whereas the case is otherwise For a Creature doth not Religiously worship a Creature but only God the Creator Now they who distinguish Religious Worship into Latria and Dulia must needs suppose the Object of it in general to be that which is Superiour to us and not the Creator only which is here contradicted by Athanasius But because it was objected against these Orthodox Fathers by the Arians that the Humanity of our Saviour Christ which is unquestionably a Creature did share in their Religious Worship also it is worth the while to see what account Athanasius gives of this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We give no Religious Worship to any Creature far be it from us For this is the Errour of the Pagans and of the Arians But We Worship the Word of God the Lord of the Creation Incarnated For though the Flesh of Christ considered alone by it self were but a part of the Creatures nevertheless was it made the Body of God And we neither Worship this Body by it self alone divided from the Word nor yet intending to worship the Word do we remove it at a great distance from this flesh but knowing that of the Scripture The Word was made Flesh we look upon this Word even in the Flesh as God And again to the same purpose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let these Arians Know at length that we who Worship the Lord in Flesh Worship no Creature but only the Creator cloathed with a Creaturely Body And for the same cause was it that Nestorius afterwards dividing the Word from the Flesh the Divinity of Christ from the Humanity and not acknowledging such an Hypostatick Vnion betwixt them as he ought but nevertheless Religiously Worshipping our Saviour Christ was therefore branded by the Christian Church with the Name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Man-Worshipper or Idolater To conclude they who excuse themselves from being Idolaters no otherwise than because they do not give that very same Religious Worship to Saints and Angels which is pecular to God Almighty and consists in honouring him as Self-Existent and the Creator of all things but acknowledge those others to be Creatures Suppose that to be Necessary to Idolatry which is Absolutely Impossible viz. to acknowledge more Omnipotents as Creators of all than One or to account Creatures as such Creators as they imply all those to be Uncapable of Idolatry who acknowledge One Supreme God the Creator of the whole World which is directly contradictious to the Doctrine of the Ancient Church Hitherto in way of Answer to an Atheistick Objection against the Naturality of the Idea of God as including Oneliness in it from the Pagan Polytheism have we largely proved that at least the Civilized and Intelligent Pagans generally acknowledged One Sovereign Numen and that their Polytheism was partly but Phantastical nothing but the Polyonymy of one Supreme God or the Worshipping him under different Names and Notions according to his several Vertues and Manifestations And that though besides this they had another Natural and Real Polytheism also yet this was only of Many Inferiour or Created Gods Subordinate to One Supreme 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Vncreated Which notwithstanding is not so to be understood as if we did confidently affirm that Opinion of Many Independent Deities never to have so much as entred into the Mind of any Mortal For since Humane Nature is so Mutable and Depravable as that notwithstanding the Connate Idea and Prolepsis of God in the Minds of Men some unquestionably do degenerate and lapse into Atheism there can be no reason why it should be thought absolutely impossible for any ever to entertain that false Conceit of More Independent Deities But as for Independent Gods Invisible we cannot trace the footsteps of such a Polytheism as this any where nor find any more than a Ditheism of a Good and Evil Principle Only Philo and others seem to have conceived That amongst the ancient Pagans some were so grosly sottish as to suppose a Plurality of Independent Gods Visible and to take the Sun and Moon and all the Stars for Such However if there were any such and these Writers were not mistaken as it frequently happened it is certain that they were but very few because amongst the most Barbarian Pagans at this day there is hardly any Nation to be found without an acknowledgment of a Sovereign Deity as appears from all those Discoveries which have been made of them since the improvement of Navigation Wherefore what hath been hitherto declared by us might well be thought a sufficient Answer to the forementioned Atheistick Objection against the Idea of God Notwithstanding which when we wrote the Contents of this Chapter we intended a further Account of the Natural and Real Polytheism of the Pagans and their Multifarious Idolatry chiefly in order to the Vindication of the Truth of Christianity against Atheists forasmuch as one grand Design hereof was unquestionably to destroy the Pagan Polytheism and Idolatry which consisted in Worshipping the Creature besides the Creator But we are very Sensible that we have been surprized in the Length of this Chapter which is already swelled into a Disproportionate Bigness by means whereof we cannot comprehend within the compass of this Volume all that belongs to the Remaining Contents together with such a Full and Copious Confutation of the Atheistick Grounds as was intended Wherefore we shall here Divide the Chapter and reserve those Remaining Contents together with a further Confutation of Atheism for another Volume which God affording Life Health and Leisure we intend shall follow Only subjoyning in the mean time a Short and Compendious Confutation of all the Atheistick Arguments proposed A CONFUTATION OF ATHEISM CHAP. V. HAving in the Second Chapter revealed all the Dark Mysteries of Atheism and producâ—d the utmost strength of that Cause and in the Tâ—ird made an Introduction to the Coâ—â—utation of those Atheistick Grounds by representing all the several Forms and Schemes of Atheism and shewing both thâ—ir Disagreements amongst themselves and wherein they all agree together
against Theists We have been hiâ—herto prevented of â—hat full and Copious Confutation of them intended by us by reason of that large Account given of the Pâ—gan Polythâ—ism which yet was no Impertinent Digression neither it removing the Grand Objâ—ction against the Naturality of the Idea of God as including Onelinâ—ss in it as also preparing a way for that Defence of Christianity designed by us against Atheists Wherefore that we may not here be quite excluded of what was principally intended we shall subjoyn a Contracted and Compendious Confutation of all the Premised Atheistick Principles The FIRST whereof was this That either men have no Idea of God at all or else none but such as is Compounded and Made up of Impossible and Contradictious Notions from whence these Atheists would inferr Him to be an Vnconceivable Nothing In Answer whereunto there hath been something done already it being declared in the Beginning of the Fourth Chapter what the Idea of God is viz. A Perfect Vnderstanding Nature Necessarily Self-Existent and the Cause of all other things And as there is Nothing either Vnconceivable or Contradictious in this Idea so have we shewed that these Confounded Atheists do not only at the same time when they verbally deny an Idea of God implicitly acknowledge and confess it for as much as otherwise denying his Existence they should deny the Existence of Nothing but also that they agree with Theists in this very Idea it being the only thing which Atheists Contend for That the First Originl and Head of all things is no Perfect Vnderstanding Nature but that all sprung from Tohu and Bohu or Dark and Senslâ—ss Matter Fortuitoâ—sly moved Moreover we have not only thus declared the Idea of God but also largely proved and made it clearly evident that the Generality of Mankind in all Ages have had a Prolepsis or Anticipation in their Minds concerning the Real and Actual Existence of such a Being the Pagans themselves besides their other Many Gods which were Vnderstanding Beings Superiour to men acknowledging One Chief and Sovereign Numen the Maker of them all and of the Whole World From whence it plainly appears that those few Atheists that formerly have been and still are here and there up and down in the World are no other than the Monsters and Anomalies of Humane Kind And this alone might be sufficient to repel the First Atheistick Assault made against the Idea of God Nevertheless that we may not seem to dissemble any of the Atheists Strength we shall here Particularly declare all their most Colourable Pretences against the Idea of God and then show the Folly and Invalidity of them Which Pretences are as follow First That we have no Idea nor Thought of any thing not Subject to Corporeal Sense nor the least Evidence of the Existence of any thing but from the same Secondly That Theists themselves acknowledging God to be Incomprehensible he may be from thence inferred to be a Non-Entity Thirdly That the Theists Idea of God including Infinity in it is therefore absolutely Vnconceivable and Impossible Fourthly That Theology is an Arbitrarious Compilement of Inconsistent and Contradictious Notions And Lastly That the Idea and Existence of God ows all its being either to the Confounded Non-Sence of Astonish'd Minds or else to the Fiction and Imposture of Politicians We begin with the First That we can have no Idea Conception or Thought of any thing not Subject to Sense nor the least Evidence of the Existence of any thing but from the same Thus a Modern Atheistick Writer Whatsoever we can conceive hath been Perceived first by Sense either at once or in parts and a man can have no Thought representing any thing not Subject to Sense From whence it fâ—llows that whatsoever is not Sensible and Imaginable is utterly unconceivable and to us Nothing Moreover the same Writer adds That the only Evidence which we have of the Existence of any thing is from Sense the Consequence whereof is this That there being no Corporeal Sense of a Deity there can be no Evidence at all of his Existence Wherefore according to the Tenour of the Atheistick Philosophy all is Resolved into Sense as the only Criterion of Truth accordingly as Protagoras in Plato's Theaetetus concludes Knowledge to be Sense and a late Writer of our own determins Sense to be Original Knowledge Here have we a wide Ocean before us but we must Contract our Sayls Were Sense Knowledge and Vnderstanding then he that sees Light and Colours and feels Heat and Cold would understand Light and Colours Heat and Cold and the like of all other Sensible Things neither would there be any Philosophy at all concerning them Whereas the Mind of man remaineth altogether unsatisfied concerning the Nature of these Corporeal Things even after the Strongest Sensations of them and is but thereby awakened to a further Philosophick Enquiry and Search about them what this Light and Colours this Heat and Cold c. Really should be and whether they be indeed Qualities in the Objects without us or only Phantasms and Sensations in our selves Now it is certain that there could be no Suspicion of any such thing as this were Sense the Highest Faculty in us neither can Sense it self ever decide this Controversie since once Sense cannot judge of another or correct the Error of it all Sense as such that is as Phancy and Apparition being alike True And had not these Atheists been Notorious Dunces in that Atomick Philosophy which they so much pretend to they would clearly have learn'd from thence That Sense is not Knowledge and Vnderstanding nor the Criterion of Truth as to Sensible things themselves it reaching not to the Essence or Absolute Nature of them but only taking notice of their Outside and perceiving its own Passions from them rather than the Things themselves and That there is a Higher Faculty in the Soul of Reason and Vnderstanding which judges of Sense detects the Phantastry and Imposture of it discovers to us that there is nothing in the Objects themselves like to those forementioned Sensible Ideas and resolves all Sensible Things into Intelligible Principles the Ideas whereof are not Foraign and Adventitious and meer Passive Impressions upon the Soul from without but Native and Domestick to it or Actively Exerted from the Soul it self no Passion being able to make a Judgment either of it self or other things This is a thing so Evident that Democritus himself could not but take notice of it and acknowledge it though he made not a right use thereof he in all Probability continuing notwithstanding a Confounded and Besotted Atheist Sextus Empiricus having recorded this of him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Democritus in his Canons affirmeth that there are Two kinds of Knowledges One by the Senses and another by the Mind Of which that by the Mind is only accounted Knowledge he bearing witness to the Faithfulness and Firmness thereof for the judgment of Truth The other by the Senses he calleth
Animals the True and Proper Cause of Motion or the Determination thereof at least is not the Matter it self Organized but the Soul either as Cogitative or Plastickly-Self Active Vitally united thereunto and Naturally Ruling over it But in the whole World it is either God himsel◠Originally impressing a certain Quantity of Motion upon the Matter of the Universe and constantly conserving the same according to that of the Sripture In him we Live Move which seems to have been the Sence also of that Noble Agrigentine Poet and Philosopher when he described God to be only A Pure or Holy Mind that with swift thoughts agitates the whole World or else it is Instrumentally an Inferiour Created Spirit Soul or Life of Nature that is a Subordinate Hylarchical Principle which hath a Power of Moving Matter Regularly according to the Direction of a Superiour Perfect Mind And thus do we see again that Ignorance of Causes is the Seed of Atheism and not of Theism no Atheists being able to assign a true Cause of Motion the Knowledge whereof plainly leadeth to a God Furthermore those Atheists who acknowledge no other Principle of things but Sensless Matter Fortuitously moved must needs be Ignorant also of the Cause of that Grand Phaenomenon called by Aristotle the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Well and Fit in Nature that is of the most Artificial Frame of the whole Mundane System in General and of the Bodies of Animals in Particular together with the Conspiring Harmony of all For they who boasted themselves able to give Natural Causes of all things whatsoever without a God can give no other Cause at all of this Phaenomenon but only that the World Happened by Chance to be thus made as it is Now they who make Fortune and Chance to be the only Cause of this so Admirable Phaenomenon the most Regular and Artificial Frame and Harmony of the Vniverse they either make the meer Absence and Want of a Cause to be a Cause Fortune and Chance being nothing else but the Absence or want of an Intending Cause Or else do they make their own Ignorance of a Cause and They know not How to be a Cause as the Author of the Leviathan interprets the meaning hereof Many times saith he men put for Cause of Natural Events their own Ignorance but disguised in other words as when they say that Fortune is the Cause of things Contingent that is of things whereof they know no Cause Or they affirm against all Reason one Contrary to be the Cause of another as Confusion to be the Cause of Order Pulchritude and Harmony Chance and Fortune to be the Cause of Art and Skill Folly and Nonsence the Cause of the most Wise and Regular Contrivance Or Lastly they deny it to have any Cause at all since they deny an Intending Cause and there cannot Possibly be any other Cause of Artificialness and Conspiring Harmony than Mind and Wisdom Councel and Contrivance But because the Atheists here make some Pretences for this their Ignorance we shall not conceal any of them but bring them all to light to the end that we may discover their Weakness and Foolery First therefore they Pretend that the World is not so Artificially and Well made but that it might have been made much Better and that there are many Faults and Flaws to be found therein from whence they would infer that it was not made by a God he being supposed by Theists to be no Bungler but a Perfect Mind or a Being Infinitely Good and Wise who therefore should have made all things for the Best But this being already set down by it self as a Twelfth Atheistick Objection against a Deity we must reserve the Confutation thereof for its proper place Only we shall observe thus much here by the way That those Theists of Later times who either because they Fancy a meer Arbitary Deity or because their Faith in the Divine Goodness is but weak or because they Judge of things according to their own Private Appetites and Selfish Passions and not with a Free Uncaptivated Vniversality of Mind and an Impartial Regard to the Good of the Whole or because they look only upon the Present Scene of things and take not in the Future into consideration nor have a Comprehensive View of the whole Plot of Divine Providence together or lastly because we Mortals do all stand upon too Low a Ground to take a commanding view and Prospect upon the whole Frame of things and our shallow Understandings are not able to fathom the Depths of the Divine Wisdom nor trace all the Methods and Designs of Providence grant That the World might have been made much Better than now it is which indeed is all one as to say that it is Not Well made these Neoterick Christians I say seem hereby to give a much greater advantage to the Atheists than the Pagan Theists themselves heretofore did who stood their Ground and generously maintained against them that Mind being the Maker of all things and not Fortune or Chance nor Arbitary Self-will and Irational Humour Omnipotent the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which is Absolutely the Best in every case so far as the Necessity of things would admit and in compliance with the Good of the Whole was the Measure and Rule both of Nature and Providence Again the Atomick Atheists further alledge that though there be many things in the world which serve well for Vses yet it does not at all follow that therefore they were made Intentionally and Designedly for those Vses because though things Happen by Chance to be so or so Made yet may they serve for something or other afterward and have their several Vses Consequent Wherefore all the things of Nature Happened say they by Chance to be so made as they are and their several Uses notwithstanding were Consequent or Following thereupon Thus the Epicurean Poet Nil ideo natum est in Corpore ut Vti Possemus sed quod Natum est id procreat Vsum. Nothing in mans Body was made out of design for any Vse but all the several Parts thereof happening to be so made as they are their Vses were Consequent thereupon In like manner the Old Atheistick Philosophers in Aristotle concluded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the Former Teeth were made by Material or Mechanical Necessity Thin and Sharp by means whereof they became fit for Cutting but the Jaw-Teeth Thick and Broad whereby they became Vseful for the Grinding of Food But neither of them were Intended to be such for the sake of these Vses but Happened by Chance only And the like concerning all the other Parts of the Body which seem to be made for Ends. Accordingly the same Aristotle represents the sence of those ancient Atheists concerning the other Parts of the Universe or Things of Nature that they were all likewise made such by the Necessity of Material or Mechanical Motions Vndirected and yet had nevertheless their several
Cogitation or Consciousness much less a Power of Vnderstanding Eternal Verities that therefore these could not be Generated out of Matter nor Corrupted into the same Because Forms and Qualities are Continually Generated and Corrupted made out of Nothing and Reduced to Nothing again therefore are they no Entities Really distinct from Matter and its different Modifications but because Souls at least Humane are unquestionably Entities Really distinct from Matter and all its Modifications therefore can they not possibly be Generated out of Matter nor Corrupted into the same For if Humane Souls were Generated out of Matter then must some Real Entity be Materially produced out of Nothing there being Nothing of Life and Cogitation in Matter which is a Thing Absolutely Impossible Wherefore these Philosophers concluded concerning Souls that being not Generated out of Matter they were Insinuated or Introduced into Bodies in Generations And this was always a Great Controversie betwixt Theists and Atheists concerning the Humane Soul as Lucretius expresseth it Nata sit an contrà Nascentibus Insinuetur Whether it were Made or Generated out of Matter that is indeed out of Nothing or else were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From Without Insinuated into Bodies in Generations Which latter Opinion of theirs supposes Souls as well to have Existed Before the Generations of all Animals as to Exist After their Deaths and Corruptions there being properly Nothing of them Generated but only their Union with those particular Bodies So that the Generations and Corruptions or Deaths of Animals according to this Hypothesis are nothing but an Anagrammatical Transposition of Things in the Universe Prae and Post-Existent Souls being sometimes united to one Body and sometimes to another But it doth not therefore follow because these Ancient Philosophers held Souls to be thus Ingenerable and to have Pre-Existed before the Generation of Animals that therefore they supposed all Souls to have Existed Of Themselves from Eternity Vnmade this being a Thing which was never asserted any more by Theist than Atheist since even those Philosophick Theists who maintained Aeternitatem Animorum The Eternity of Humane Minds and Souls together with the Worlds did notwithstanding assert their Essential Dependence upon the Deity like that of the Lights upon the Sun as if they were a kind of Eternal Effulgency Emanation or Eradiation from an Eternal Sun Even Proclus himself that Great Champion for the Eternity of the World and Souls in this very Case when he writes against Plutarch's Self-Existent Evil Soul expresly declaring that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is no Self Existent Soul but every Soul whatsoever is the Work Effect and Production of God Wherefore when they affirmed Souls to be Ingenerable their meaning was no more than this that they were not meer Accidental Things as Forms and Qualities are nor any more Generated out of Matter than Matter it self is Generated out of Something else upon which account as Aristotle informs us Souls were called also by them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Principles as well as Matter they being both of them Substances in the Universe alike Original that is neither of them Made out of the other But they did not suppose them to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ingenerate or Vnmade in the other Sense as if they had been Self-Originated and Independent as Plutarch's Second and Third Principles his Evil Soul and Matter were by him Imagined to be but so doubtless as that if the World had had any beginning they should then have been all Created together with it out of Nothing Prae-Existing But as for the perpetual Creation of new Souls in the Successive Generations of Animals this indeed is a thing which those Philosophers were extremely abhorrent from as thinking it Incongruous that Souls which are in Order of Nature Senior to Bodies should be in Order of Time Juniors to them as also not Reasonable that Divine Creation as it were Prostituted should without end perpetually attend and wait upon Natural Generations and be Intermingled with them But as for this Prae-Existence of Souls we have already declared our own sense concerning it in the First Chapter Though we cannot deny but that besides Origen several others of the Ancient Fathers before the Fifth Council seem either to have Espoused it or at least to have had a favour and kindness for it insomuch that St. Austine himself is sometimes Staggering in this Point and thinks it to be a Great Secret whether mens Souls Existed before their Generations or no and some where concludes it to be a matter of Indifferency wherein every one may have his Liberty of opining either way without offence Wherefore all that can be certainly affirmed in this Case is that Humane Souls could not possibly be Generated out of Matter but were some time or other Created by God Almighty out of Nothing Prae-Existing either In Generations or Before them Lastly as for Brute Animals we must confess that If they be not meer Machines or Automata as some seem inclinable to believe but Conscious and Thinking Beings then from the same Principle of Reason it will likewise follow that they cannot be Generated out of Matter neither and therefore must be Derived from the Fountain of all Life and Created out of Nothing by him who since he can as easily Annihilate as Create and does all for the Best no man need at all to trouble himself about their Permanency or Immortality And now have we given a Full and Particular Account of all the Several Senses wherein this Axiom must be acknowledged to be Undeniably True That Nothing can possibly be Made out of Nothing or Come from Nothing namely these Three First That Nothing which was Not could ever bring it self into Being or Efficiently Produce it self Or That Nothing can possibly be Made without an Efficient Cause Secondly that Nothing which was Not could be Produced or brought into Being by any other Efficient Cause then such as hath at least Equal Perfection in it and a Sufficient Active or Productive Power For if any thing were made by that which hath not Equal Perfection then must so much of the Effect as Transcendeth the Cause be indeed Made without a Cause since Nothing can Give what it hath not or be Caused by it self or by Nothing Again to suppose a thing to be Produced by that which hath no Sufficient Productive Power is Really to suppose it also to be Produced from It self without a Cause or From Nothing Where it is acknowledged by us That no Natural Imperfect Created Being can Create or Emanatively Produce a New Substance which was not Before and give it its Whole Being Hitherto is the Axiom Verified in Respect of the Efficient Cause But in the Third Place it is also True in respect of the Material likewise Not That Nothing could Possibly be ever Made by any Power whatsoever but only out of Pre-Existent Matter and Consequently that Matter it self could be never Made but was Self-Existent For the
to be the same with that in another In like manner Simplicius proving that Body is not the first Principle because there must of necessity be Something Self-moving and what is so must needs be Incorporeal writeth thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because what is such must of necessity be Indivisible and Indistant for were it Divisible and Distant it could not all of it be conjoyned with its whole self so that the whole should both actively move and be moved Which same thing seems further Evident in the Souls being All Conscious of It Self and Reflexive upon its whole Self which could not be were one part of it Distant from another Again the same Philosopher expresly denieth the Soul though a Self-moving Substance to be at all Locally Moved otherwise then by accident in respect of the Body which is moved by it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Soul being not Moved by Corporeal or Local Motions for in respect of these it is Immoveable but by Cogitative ones only the names whereof are Consultation and Deliberation c. by these Moveth Bodies Locally And that this was Really Plato's meaning also when he determined the Soul to be a Self-moving Substance and the Cause of all Bodily Motion that moving it self in a way of Cogitation it moved Bodies Locally Notwithstanding that Aristotle would not take notice of it sufficiently appears from his own words and is acknowledged by the Greek Scholiasts themselves upon Aristotle's De Anima Thus again Simplicius elsewhere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Since the Soul is not in a place it is not capable of any Local Motion We should omit the Testimonies of any more Philosophers were it not that we find Porphyrius so full and express herein who makes this the very beginning of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his Manuduction to Intelligibles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That though Every Body be in a Place yet Nothing that is properly Incorporeal is in a Place and who afterwards further pursues it in this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neither does that which is Incorporeal move Locally by Will Place being Relative only to Magnitude and Bulk But that which is devoid of Bulk and Magnitude is likewise devoid of Local Motion Wherefore it is only present by a certain Disposition and Inclination of it to one thing more than another nor is its presence there discernible otherwise than by its operations and Effects Again concerning the Three Divine Hypostases he writeth thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The Supreme God is therefore Every where because he is Nowhere and the same is true also of the Second and Third Divine Hypostasis Nous and Psyche The Supreme God is Every where and No where in respect of those things which are after him and only his own and in himself Nous or Intellect is in the Supreme God Every where and No where as to those things that are after him Psyche or the Mundane Soul is both in Intellect and the Supreme God and Every where and No where as to Bodies Lastly Body is both in the Soul of the World and in God Where he denies God to be Locally in the Corporeal World and thinks it more proper to say that the Corporeal World is in God then God in it because the World is held and contained in the Divine Power but the Deity is not in the Locality of the World Moreover he further declares his Sense after this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nor if there were conceived to be such an Incorporeal Space or Vacuum as Democritus and Epicurus supposed could Mind or God possibly Exist in this Empty Space as Co-extended with the same for this would be only Receptive of Bodies but it could not receive the Energie of Mind or Intellect nor give any Place or Room to that that being no Bulkie thing And again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Corporeal World is Distantly present to the Intelligible or the Deity and that is Indivisibly and Indistantly present with the World But when that which is Indistant and Vnextended is present with that which is Distant and Extended then is the Whole of the Former one and the same Numerically in Every part of the Latter That is it is Indivisibly and Vnmultipliedly and Illocally there according to its own Nature present with that which is naturally Divisible and Multipliable and in a Place Lastly he affirmeth the same likewise of the Humane Soul that this is also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Substance devoid of Magnitude and which is not Locally present to this or that Body but by Disposition and Energie and therefore the Whole of it in every part thereof Vndividedly And as for Christian Writers besides Origen who was so famous an Asserter of Incorporeal Substance that as Socrates recordeth the Egyptian Monks and Anthropomorphites threatned death to Theophilus the Alexandrian Bishop unless he would at once execrate and renounce the Writings of Origen and profess the Belief of a Corporeal God of Humane Form and who also maintained Incorporeal Substance to be Vnextended as might be proved from Sundry Passages both of his Book against Celsus and that Peri Archon we say besides Origen and others of the Greeks St. Austine amongst the Latins clearly asserted the same he maintaining in his Book De Quantitate Animae and else where concerning the Humane Soul that being Incorporeal it hath no Dimensions of Length Breadth and Profundity and is Illocabilis No where as in a Place We shall conclude with the Testimony of Boetius who was both a Philosopher and a Christian Quaedam sunt saith he Communes Animi Conceptiones per se notae apud Sapientes tantum Vt Incorporalia non esse In Loco There are certain Common Conceptions or Notions of the Mind which are known by themselves amongst wise men only as this for example That Incorporeals are in No Place From whence it is manifest that the generality of reputed Wise men were not formerly of this opinion Quod Nusquam est nihil est That what is No where or in no certain Place is Nothing and that this was not look'd upon by them as a Common Notion but only as a Vulgar Errour By this time we have made it unquestionably Evident that this Opinion of Incorporeal Substance being Vnextended Indistant and Devoid of Magnitude is no Novel or Recent thing nor first started in the Scholastick Age but that it was the general Perswasion of the most ancient and learned Asserters of Incorporeal Substance especially that the Deity was not Part of it Here and Part of it There nor the Substance thereof Mensurable by Yards and Poles as if there were so much of it contained in one Room and so much and no more in another according to their several Dimensions but that the whole Vndivided Deity was at once in Every Part of the world and consequently No where Locally after the manner of Bodies But because this
the Deity by Theists is generally supposed to be a Living Being Perfectly Happy and Immortal or Incorruptible there can be no such Living Being Immortal and Consequently none Perfectly Happy Because all Living Beings whatsoever are Concretions of Atoms which as they were at first Generated so are they again liable to Death and Curruption Life being no Simple Primitive Nature nor Substantial thing but a meer Accidental Modification of Compounded Bodies only which upon the Disunion of their Parts or the Disordering of their Contexture vanisheth again into Nothing And there being no Life Immortal Happiness must needs be a meer Insignificant Word and but a Romantick Fiction Where first This is well that the Atheists will confess that according to their Principles there can be no such thing at all as Happiness because no Security of Future Permanency all Life perpetually coming Out of Nothing and whirling back into Nothing again But this Atheistick Argument is likewise Founded upon the Former Errour That Body is the Only Substance the First Principles whereof are devoid of all Life and Vnderstanding whereas it is certain that Life cannot possibly result from any Composition of Dead and Lifeless things and therefore must needs be a Simple and Primitive Nature It is true indeed that the Participated Life in the Bodies of Animals which yet is but improperly called Life it being Nothing but their being Actuated by a Living Soul is a meer Accidental thing Generable and Corruptible since that Body which is now Vitally united to a Living Soul may be Disunited again from it and thereby become a Dead and Lifeless Carcase but the Primary or Original Life it self is Substantial nor can there be any Dead Carcase of a Humane Soul That which hath Life Essentially belonging to the Substance of it must needs be Naturally Immortal because no Substance can of it self Perish or Vanish into Nothing Besides which there must be also some not only Substantial but also Eternal Vnmade Life whose Existence is Necessary and which is Absolutely Vnannihilable by any thing else which therefore must needs have Perfect Security of its own future Happiness And this is an Incorporeal Deity And this is a Brief Confutation of the Eight Atheistick Argument BUt the Democritick Atheist proceeds endeavouring further to Disprove a God from the Phaenomena of Motion and Cogitation in the Three following Argumentations First therefore whereas Theists commonly bring an Argument from Motion to Prove a God or First Vnmoved Mover the Atheists contend on the contrary that from the very Nature of Motion the Impossibility of any such First Vnmoved Mover is clearly Demonstrable For it being an Axiom of undoubted Truth concerning Motion That Whatsoever is Moved is Moved by some other thing Or That Nothing can Move it self it follows from thence Unavoydably That there is no Aeternum Immobile No Eternal Vnmoved Mover but on the contrary that there was Aeternum Motum an Eternal Moved Or That One thing was Moved by Another from Eternity Infinitely Without any First Mover or Cause Because as Nothing could move it self So could nothing ever Move Another but what was it self before Moved by Something else To which we Reply That this Axiom Whatsoever is Moved is Moved by Another and not by It self was by Aristotle and those other Philosophers who made so much use thereof restrained to the Local Motion of Bodies only That no Body Locally Moved was ever Moved Originally from it self but from something else Now it will not at all follow from hence That therefore Nihil Movetur nisi à Moto That No Body was ever Moved but by some othâ—r Body that was also before Moved by Something else or That of necessity One Body was moved by another Body and that by another and so backwards Infinitely without any First Vnmoved or Self-Moving and Self-Active Mover as the Democritick Atheist fondly Conceits For the Motion of Bodies might proceed as Unquestionably it did from something else which is not Body and was not Before Moved Moreover the Democritick Atheist here also without any Ground imagines That were there but One Push once given to the world and no more this Motion would from thence forward always continue in it one Body still moving another to all Eternity For though this be indeed a Part of the Cartesian Hypothesis that according to the Laws of Nature A Body Moving will as well continue in Motion as a Body Resting in Rest until that Motion be Communicated and Transferred to some other Body yet is the Case different here Where it is supposed not only one Push to have been given to the world at first but also the same Quantity of Motion or Agitation to be constantly Conserved and Maintained But to let this pass because it is something a Subtle Point and not so rightly Understood by many of the Cartesians themselves We say that it is a thing Utterly Impossible That One Body should be Moved by Another Infinitely without any first Cause or Mover which was Self Active and that not from the Authority of Aristotle only Pronouncing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. That in the Causes of Motion there could not Possibly be an Infinite Progress but from the Reason there subjoyned by Aristotle Because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If there were no First Vnmoved Mover there could be no Cause of Motion at all For were all the Motion that is in the World a Passion from something else and yet no First Vnmoved Active Mover then must it be a Passion from no Agent or without an Action and Consequently proceed from Nothing and either Cause it self or be Made without a Cause Now the Ground of the Atheists Errour here is only from hence because He taketh it for granted That there is no other Substance besides Body nor any other Action but Local Motion from whence it comes to pass that to Him this Proposition No Body can Move it self is one and the same with this Nothing can Act from It self or be Self-Active And thus is the Atheistick Pretended Demonstration against a God or First Cause from Motion abundantly Confuted we having made it Manifest that there is no Consequence at all in this Argument That because No Body can Move it Self therefore there can be no First Vnmoved Mover as also having discovered the Ground of the Atheists Errour here their taking it for granted that there is Nothing but Body and lastly having plainly showed that it implies a Contradiction there should be Action and Motion in the World and yet Nothing Self-Moving or Self-Active So that it is Demonstratively certain from Motion that there is a First Cause or Vnmoved Mover We shall now further add That from the Principle acknowledged by the Democritick Atheists themselves That No Body can move it self it follows also undeniably that there is some Other Substance besides Body something Incorporeal which is Self-Moving and Self-Active and was the First Vnmoved Mover of the Heavens or World For
Co-Extended with its Rayes and Light it would see and perceive every Atom of Matter that it s out stretched Beams reached to and touched Now all Created Beings are themselves in some sense but the Rayes of the Deity which therefore cannot but Feel and Sensibly Perceive all these its own Effluxes and Emanations Men themselves can order and manage Affairs in several distant Places at once without any Disturbance and we have innumerable Notions of things in our Mind that lie there easily together without Crowding one another or Causing any Distraction to us Nevertheless the Minds of weak Mortals may here be somewhat eased and helped by considering what hath been before suggested That there is no necessity God Almighty should 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do all things himself Immediately and Drudgingly but he may have his Inferiour Ministers and Executioners under him to discharge him of that Supposed Encumberment As First of all an Artificial Plastick Nature which without Knowledge and Animal Consciousness disposes the Matter of the Universe according to the Platform or Idea of a Perfect Mind and forms the Bodies of all Animals And this was the Reason why we did before insist so much upon this Artificial Regular and Methodical Nature namely that Divine Providence might neither be excluded from having an Influence upon all things in this Lower World as resulting only from the Fortuitous Motions of Sensless Matter unguided by any Mind nor yet the Deity be supposed to do every thing it self Immediatly and Miraculously without the Subservient Ministery of any Natural Causes which would seem to us Mortals to be not only a Violent but also an Operose Cumbersom and Moliminous Business And thus did Plato acknowledge that there were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Certain Causes of a Prudent that is Artificial and Orderly Nature which God makes use of as Subservient to himself in the Mundane Oeconomy Besides which those Instincts also impressed upon Animals and which they are Passive to directing them to Act for Ends either not understood or not attended to by them in order to their own Good and the Good of the Universe are another part of that Divine Fate which inserted into things themselves is the Servant and Executioner of Providence Above all which there are yet other Knowing and Vnderstanding Ministers of the Deity as its Eyes and Hands Demoniack or Angelick Beings appointed to preside over Mankind all Mundane Affairs and the Things of Nature they having their several distinct Offices and Provinces assigned them Of which also Plato thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There are certain Rulers or Presidents appointed by that Supreme God who Governs the whole world over all the several things and Parts therein even to the smallest Distribution of them All which Inferiour Causes are constantly over looked and supervised by the Watchful Eye of God Almighty himself who may also sometimes Extraordinarily Interpose We need not therefore restrain and confine Divine Providence to a Few Greater things only as some do that we may thereby consult the ease of the Deity and its Freedom from Distraction but may and ought to Extend it to all things whatsoever Small as well as Great And indeed the Great things of the World cannot well be ordered neither without some regard to the Small and Little 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As Architects affirm that great stones cannot be well placed together in a Building without little Neither can Generals of Armies nor Governours of Families nor Masters of Ships nor Mechanick Artificers discharge their several Functions and do their Works respectively as they ought did they not mind the Small things also as well as the Great 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the forementioned Philosopher 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let us not therefore make God Almighty Inferiour to Mortal Opificers who by one and the same Art can order Small things as well as Great and so suppose him to be Supine and negligent Nevertheless the Chief Concernment and Employment of Divine Providence in the World is the Oeconomy of Souls or Government of Rational Beings which is by Plato contracted into this Compendium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. There is no other work left for the Supreme Governour of all then only to Translate Better Souls into Better places and Conditions and Worser into Worser or as he after addeth to dispose of every one in the world in such a manner as might best render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vertue victorious and triumphant over Vice And thus may the slow and Imperfect wits of Mortals be satisfied that Providence to the Deity is no Moliminous Laborious and Distractious thing But that there is no higher Spring of Life in Rational Animals than Contracted Self Love and that all Good Will and Benevolence arises only from Indigency and Imbecillity and That no Being whatsoever is concerned in the welfare of any other thing but only what it self stands in Need of and Lastly therefore That what is Irresistibly Powerful and Needs nothing would have no manner of Benevolence nor concern it self in the Good and Welfare of any thing whatsoever This is but another Idol of the Atheists Den and only argues their Bad Nature Low-sunck Minds and Gross Immorality And the same is to be said also of that other Maxim of theirs That what is perfectly Happy would have nothing at all To Do but only enjoy its own Ease and Quiet whereas there is nothing more troublesome to our selves than this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this having Nothing to Do and the Activity of the Deity or a Perfect Being is altogether as Easie to it as its Essence The Atheistick Queries come next to be Answered which being but Three are Naturally to be disposed in this order First If there were a God or Perfect Being who therefore was sufficiently Happy in the enjoyment of himself Why would he go about to make a World Secondly If he must needs make a World why did he not make it sooner this Late production thereof looking as if he had but newly awaked out out of a long sleep throughout Infinite Past Ages or else had in length of time contracted a Satiety of his Solitude Thirdly and Lastly What Tools or Instruments what Machines or Engines had be or How could he move the Matter of the whole world especially if Incorporeal because then he would run through all things and could not lay hold nor fasten upon any thing To the First therefore we say That the reason why God made the World was from his own Overflowing and Communicative Goodness that there might be other Beings also Happy besides him and enjoy themselves Nor does this at all clash with God's making of the world for his own Glory and Honour though Plotinus were so shy of that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is ridiculous to say that God made the world that he might be Honoured this being to transfer the affections of humane Artificers and Statuaries upon him
thing Proved from their Vulgar Religion and Theology Hammon being a proper Name for the Supreme God amongst them and therefore Styled the Egyptian Jupiter Page 337 Though this word Hammon were probably at first the same with Ham or Cham the Son of Noah yet will not this hinder but that it might be used afterwards by the Egyptians for the Supreme God Page 338 The Egyptian God Hammon neither confined by them to the Sun nor to the Corporeal World but according to the Notation of the word in the Egyptian Language a Hidden and Invisible Deity This farther confirmed from the Testimony of Iamblichus Page 339 This Egyptian Hammon more than once taken notice of in Scripture Page 339 340 That the Egyptians acknowledged one Universal Numen further proved from that Famous Inscription upon the Saitick Temple I Am all that Was Is and Shall be and my Veil no Mortal hath ever yet Uncovered That this cannot be Vnderstood of Senseless Matter nor of the Corporeal Universe but of a Divine Mind or Wisedom diffusing it self thorough all The Peplum or Veil cast over the Statue as well of the Saitick as Athenian Minerva Hieroglyphically signified the Invisibility and Incomprehensibility of the Deity which is Veiled in its works From what Proclus addeth to this Inscription beyond Plutarch And the Sun was the Fruit which I produced Evident that this was a Demiurgical Deity the Creatour of the Sun and of the World Page 341 342 How that passage of Hecataeus in Plutarch is to be Vnderstood That the Egyptians supposed the First God and the Universe to be the same viz. Because the Supreme Deity diffuseth it self thorough all things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Name of God also amongst the Greek Philosophers Page 343 That Pan to the Arcadians and other Vulgar Greeks was not the Corporeal World as Senseless and Inanimate but as proceeding from an Intellectual Principle diffusing it self through all from Macrobius and Phornutus Socrates his Prayer to Pan as the Supreme God in Plato's Phaedrus Page 343 344 Our Saviour Christ called the Great Pan by Demons Page 345 How the old Egyptian Theology That God is All things is every where insisted upon in the Trismegistick Writings Page 346 347 That the Supreme God was sometimes worshipped by the Egyptians under other Proper Personal names as Isis Osiris and Serapis c. Page 349 c. Recorded in Eusebius from Porphyrius that the Egyptians acknowledged one Intellectual Demiurgus or Maker of the World under the name of Cneph whom they pictured putting forth an Egg out of his Mouth This Cneph said to have produced another God whom the Egyptians called Phtha the Greeks Vulcan the Soul of the World and Artificial Plastick Nature The Testimony of Plutarch That the Thebaites worshipped onely One Eternal and Immortal God under this name of Cneph Page 412 Thus according to Apuleius the Egyptians worshipped One and the same Supreme God under many different Names and Notions ibid. Probable that the Egyptians distinguished Hypostases in the Deity also Kircherus his Egyptian Hieroglyphick of the Trinity An Intimation in Iamblichus of an Egyptian Trinity Eiction Emeph or Hemphta which is the same with Cneph and Phtha Page 413 The Doctrine of God's being All made by the Egyptians a Foundation of Polytheism and Idolatry they being led hereby to Personate and Deify the several Parts of the World and Things of Nature which in the Language of the Asclepian Dialogue is To call God by the name of every thing or every thing by the name of God the wise amongst them nevertheless understanding that all was but one Simple Deity worshipped by Piece-Meale This Allegorically signified by Osiris his being dismembred and cut in pieces by Typhon and then made up One again by Isis. Page 354 355 XIX That the Poets many ways deprav'd the Pagan Theology and made it to have a more Aristocratical Appearance Page 355 c. Notwithstanding which they did not really assert Many Self-Existent and Independent Gods but One onely Unmade and all the rest Generated or Created Homer's Gods not all Eternal and Unmade but Generated out of the Ocean that is a Watry Chaos Homer's Theogonia as well as Hesiod's the Cosmogonia and his Generation of Gods the same thing with the Production or Creation of the World Page 357 358 Nevertheless Homer distinguished from all those Generated Gods One Vnmade God the Father or Creatour of them and of the World Page 359 Homer thus understood by the Pagans themselves as Plutarch Proclus and Aristotle Page 359 360 Though Hesiod's Gods properly so called were all of them Generated yet did He suppose also One Unmade God the Maker of them and of the World Page 360 361 Pindar likewise a Divine Theogonist an Asserter of One Unmade Deity and no more the Cause of all things yet nevertheless of Many Generated Gods besides His One God to be worshipped far above all the other Gods Page 361 362 The Suspicion which Aristotle sometime had of Hesiod and Plato of Homer seems to have proceeded from their not Vnderstanding that Mosaick Cabbala followed by them both of the World 's being Made out of a Watery Chaos Page 362 That famous Passage of Sophocles concerning One God the Maker of Heaven Earth and Seas cited by so many Ancient Fathers defended as genuine Page 363 Clear places in the extant Tragedies of Euripides to the same purpose with other remarkable ones cited out of his now inextant Tragedies Besides the Testimonies of other Greek Poets Page 363 c. The Consent of Latine Poets also in the Monarchy of the whole Page 365 XX. After the Poets of the Pagans their Philosophers considered That Epicurus was the onely reputed Philosopher who pretending to acknowledge Gods yet professedly opposed Monarchy and verbally asserted a Multitude of Eternal Unmade Deities but such as had Nothing to doe either with the Making or Governing of the World He therefore clearly to be reckoned amongst the Atheists All the Pagan Philosophers who were Theists a few Ditheists excepted Vniversally asserted a Mundane Monarchy Page 369 370. Pythagoras a Polytheist as much as the other Pagans nevertheless a plain Acknowledger of one One Supreme God the Maker of the Vniverse Page 371 Pythagoras his Dyad no Evil God or Demon Self-existent as Plutarch supposed Page 372 But this Dyad of his whether Matter or no derived from a Monad One Simple Vnity the Cause of all things Page 372 373 That Pythagoras acknowledging a Trinity of Divine Hypostases did therefore sometimes describe God as a Monad sometimes as a Mind and sometimes as the Soul of the World Page 373 The Pythagorick Monad and First God the same with the Orphick Love Seniour to Japhet and Saturn and the Oldest of all the Gods a Substantial thing But that Love which Plato would have to be the Youngest of the Gods the Daughter of Penia or Indigency and a Parturient thing Nothing but a Creaturely affection in Souls Personated and Deified Parmenides his
such as made the World to be the Third God Such a Trinity a Confounding of God and Creature together Page 551 552 And that this an Adulterated Notion of the Trinity evident from hence because no Reason why these Philosophers should stop here since the Sun Moon and Stars and their other Generated Gods differ not in Kind but onely in Degree from the World Page 552 Neither will this excuse them that they understood this chiefly of the Soul of the World Since if there were such a Mundane Soul as together with the VVorld made up One Animal this it self must needs be a Creature also ibid. This probably the Reason why Philo though acknowledging the Divine Word as a Second God and Second Cause yet no-where speaketh of a Third God lest he should thereby seem to Deify the whole Created World Though he call God also in some Sense the Soul of the World too whether meaning thereby his First or his Second God So that Philo seems to have acknowledged onely a Duality and not a Trinity of Divine Hypostases Page 552 553 Another Depravation of this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theology of Divine Tradition or Cabbala of the Trinity That some of these Platonists and Pythagoreans concluding all those several Idea's of the Divine Intellect or Archetypall World to be so many distinct Substances Animals and Gods have thereby made their Second Hypostasis not One but a Heap of Innumerable Gods and Hypostases and consequently destroyed their Trinity Page 553 Though Philo again here Platonized so far as to suppose an Incorporeal Heaven and Earth and an Intelligible Sun Moon and Stars to have been made before the Corporeal and Sensible yet does he no-where declare them to be so many distinct Substances and Animals much less Gods but on the contrary censures that for Pagan Idolatry This Pretence of worshipping the Divine Idea's in all Sensible things that which gave Sanctuary and Protection to the Foulest and Sottishest of all the Pagan Idolatries The Egyptians worshipping Brute Animals thus and the Greeks the Parts of the World Inanimate and Natures of Things Page 554 A Third Depravation or Adulteration of the Divine Cabbala of the Trinity by Proclus and other latter Platonists asserting an innumerable Company of Henades Particular Unities Superiour to the First Nous or Intellect their Second Hypostasis as also innumerable Noes Substantiall Minds or Intellects Superiour to the First Psyche their Third Hypostasis Page 555 These Noes seem to be asserted by Plotinus also as likewise the Henades and Agathotetes were by Simplicius Page 555 556 A Swarm of Innumerable Pagan Gods from hence besides their Intelligible Gods or Idea's Particular Henades and Noes Unities and Intellects ibid. Now since these Particular Henades and Noes of theirs must needs be Creatures the Trinity of Proclus and such others nothing but a Scale or Ladder of Nature wherein God and the Creature are Confounded together the Juncture or Commissure betwixt them being no-where discernible as if they differ'd onely in Degrees A gross Mistake and Adulteration of the Ancient Cabbala of the Trinity Page 556 557 This that Platonick or rather Pseudo-Platonick Trinity by us opposed to the Christian viz. such a Trinity as confounds the Differences betwixt God and the Creature bringing the Deity by degrees down lower and lower and at length scattering it into all the Animated Parts of the World A Foundation for Infinite Polytheism Cosmolatry or World-Idolatry and Creature-Worship Hence the Platonists and Pythagoreans the Fittest men to be Champions for Paganism against Christianity Page 557 558 Concerning the Christian Trinity Three things to be Observed First that it is not a Trinity of meer Names and Words nor Logicall Notions or Inadequate Conceptions of God this Doctrine having been condemned by the Christian Church in Sabellius and others but a Trinity of Hypostases Subsistences or Persons Page 558 559 The Second thing Observable in the Christian Trinity That though the Second Hypostasis thereof were Begotten from the First and the Third Proceedeth both from the First and Second yet neither of them Creatures First because not made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or from an Antecedent Non-existence brought forth into Being but both of them Coeternall with the Father Secondly because all Necessarily existent and Un-Annihilable Thirdly because all of them Universall or Infinite and Creatours of all other Particular Beings Page 559 The Third Observable as to the Christian Trinity That the Three Hypostases thereof are all Truly and Really One God not onely by Reason of Agreement of Will but also of a Mutuall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Permeation of each other and Inexistence Though no Instance of the like Unity to be found elsewhere in Nature yet since two distinct Substances Corporeal and Incorporeal make one Man and Person in our Selves much more may Three Divine Hypostases be One God ibid. Though much of Mystery in the Christian Trinity yet nothing of plain Contradiction to Reason therein that is no Nonsense and Impossibility The Ill Design of those who represent the Christian Trinity as absolutely Contradictious to Reason that they may thereby debauch mens Vnderstandings and make them swallow down other things which unquestionably are such Page 560 The Christian Trinity much more agreeable to Reason then the Pseudo-Platonick in the Three Particulars before mentioned First its making their Third Hypostasis the Animated World or Mundane Soul Which not onely too great a Leap betwixt the Second and Third but also a gross Debasement of the Deity and Confounding it with the Creature a Foundation for World-Idolatry and worshipping Inanimate Things as Parts and Members of God ibid. God to Origen but Quasi Anima Mundi As it were the Soul of the World and not Truly and Properly such All the Perfection of this Notion to be attributed to God but not the Imperfection thereof Page 560 561 Certain that according to the more refined Platonists their Third Divine Hypostasis not a Mundane but Supra-mundane Soul and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Opificer of the whole World So to Amelius Porphyrius and Plotinus A Double Soul of the World to Plato likewise The Third Hypostasis to these no Creature but a Creatour Page 562 So in their Second Particular whereby the forementioned Pseudo-Platonick Trinity no Trinity its making all the Idea's and Archetypal Paradigms of things so many Hypostases Animals and Gods This a Monstrous Extravagancy Not to be doubted but that Plato well understood these Idea's to be Nothing but Noemata or Conceptions of the Divine Mind existing no-where apart by themselves however called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Essences or Substances because not such Accidental and Evanid things as our Humane Thoughts are they being the Standing and Eternall Objects of all Science As also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Animals to signify that they were not meer Dead Forms as Pictures upon Paper or Carved Statues And thus did not onely Amelius understand S. John
Existent Being is Contingent to be or not to be which a Contradiction The Absurdity of this will better appear if instead of Necessary Existence we put in Actuall No Theists can otherwise prove that a God though supposed to Exist might not Happen by Chance to Be. Nevertheless God or a Perfect Being not here Demonstrated à Priori when from its own Idea The Reader left to make a Judgment Page 723 724 A Progymnasma or Praelusory Attempt towards the proving of a God from his Idea as including Necessary Existence First From our having an Idea of a Perfect Being Implying no manner of Contradiction in it it follows that such a thing is Possible And from that Necessary Existence Included in this Idea added to the Possibility thereof it further follows that it Actually Is. A Necessary Existent Being if Possible Is because upon the supposition of its Non-Existence it would be Impossible for it ever to have been Not so in Contingent things A Perfect Being is either Impossible to have Been or else it Is. Were God Possible and yet Not He would not be a Necessary but Contingent Being However no Stress laid upon this Page 724 725 Another Plainer Argument for the Existence of a God from his Idea Whatsoever we can frame an Idea of in our Minds implying no Contradiction this either Actually Is or else if it Be Not is Possible to Be. But if God Be Not he is not Possible to Be. Therefore He Is. The Major before Proved That we cannot have an Idea of any thing which hath neither Actuall nor Possible Existence Page 725 A Further Ratiocination from the Idea of God as including Necessary Existence by certain Steps First Certain that something or other did Exist of It self from Eternity without Beginning Again Whatsoever did Exist of It self from Eternity did so Exist Naturally and Necessarily and therefore there is a Necessary Existent Being Thirdly Nothing could Exist of It self from Eternity Naturally and Necessarily but what contained Necessary Self-Existence in its Nature Lastly A Perfect Being and nothing else containeth Necessary Existence in its Nature Therefore It Is. An Appendix to this Argument That no Temporary Successive Being could be from Eternity without Beginning This Proved before Page 725 726 Again The Controversie betwixt Atheists and Theists First Clearly Stated from the Idea of God and then Satisfactorily Decided Premised That as every thing was not Made so neither was every thing Unmade Atheists agree in both The State of the Controversie betwixt Theists and Atheists Whether that which being it self Unmade was the Cause of all other things Made were the Most Perfect or the Most Imperfect Being A certain kind of Atheistick Theism or Theogonism which acknowledging a God or Soul of the World presiding over the Whole supposed him notwithstanding to have Emerged out of Night and Chaos that is to have been Generated out of Sensless Matter Page 726 728 The Controversie thus Stated easily Decided Certain That Lesser Perfection may be derived from Greater or from that which is Absolutely Perfect but Impossible That Greater Perfection and Higher Degrees of Entity should rise out of Lesser and Lower Things did not Ascend but Descend That Life and Sense may Naturally rise from the meer Modification of Dead and Sensless Matter as also Reason and Understanding from Sense the Philosophy of the Kingdom of Darkness The Hylozoists so Sensible of this that there must be some Substantial Unmade Life and Understanding that Atheizing they thought it Necessary to Attribute Life and Understanding to all Matter as such This Argument a Demonstration of the Impossibility of Atheism Page 728 729 The Controversie again more Particularly Stated from the Idea of God as including Mind and Understanding in it Viz. Whether all Mind were Made or Generated out of Senseless Matter or Whether there were an Eternal Unmade Mind the Maker of all This the Doctrine of Theists That Mind the Oldest of all things of Atheists That it is a Postnate thing Younger then the World and an Umbratile Image of Real Beings Page 729 The Controversie thus Stated again Decided Though it does not follow That if once there had been no Corporeal World or Matter there could never have been any yet is it certain That if once there had been no Life nor Mind there could never have been any Life or Mind Our Imperfect Minds not Of Themselves from Eternity and therefore Derived from a Perfect Unmade Mind Page 729 730 That Atheists think their chief strength to lie here in their Disproving a God from the Nature of Understanding and Knowledge According to them Things made Knowledge and not Knowledge Things All Mind and Understanding the Creature of Sensibles and a Phantastick Image of them and therefore no Mind their Creatour Thus does a Modern Writer conclude That Knowledge and Understanding is not to be Attributed to God because it implieth Dependence upon Things without which is all one as if he should have said That Sensless Matter is the most Perfect of all things and the Highest Numen Page 730 A Compendious Confutation of the Premised Atheistick Principles Knowledge not the Activity of Sensibles upon the Knower and his Passions Sensible things themselves not Known by the Passion or Phancy of Sense Knowledge not from the Force of the Thing Known but of the Knower Besides Phantasms of Singular Bodies Intelligible Idea's Vniversal A late Atheistick Paradox That Universals nothing but Names Axiomatical Truths in Abstract Sciences no Passion from Bodies by Sense nor yet gathered by Induction from Many Singulars we at once Perceiving it Impossible that they should be otherwise An Ingenious Observation of Aristotle's That could it be Perceived by Sense the Three Angles of a Triangle to be Equal to Two Right yet would not this be Science or Knowledge Properly so called which is of Universals First and from thence descends to Singulars Page 730 732 Again We have Conceptions of things Incorporeal as also of such Corporeals as never did Exist and whose Accuracy Sense could not reach to as a Perfect straight Line and Plain Superficies an Exact Triangle Circle or Sphear That we have a Power of framing Idea's of things that never were nor will be but onely Possible Page 732 Inferred from hence That Humane Science it self not the meer Image and Creature of Singular Sensibles but Proleptical to them and in order of Nature Before them But since there must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Intelligibles before Intellection the onely true Account of Knowledge and its Original is from a Perfect Omnipotent Being Comprehending it self and the Extent of its own Power or the Possibilities of all things their Relations and Immutable Truths And of this one Perfect Mind all Imperfect Minds Partake Page 732 733 Knowledge therefore in the Nature of it supposeth the Existence of a Perfect Omnipotent Being as its 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Intelligible This Comprehending it self the First
be a Modification of Sensless Matter or Result from Figures Sites Motions and Magnitudes Humane Souls Substantiall and therefore according to this Doctrine must have been Never Made whereas Atheists stifly deny both their Prae and Post-Existence Those Pagan Theists who held the Eternity of Humane Minds supposed them notwithstanding to have Depended upon the Deity as their Cause Before Proved That there can be but One Understanding Being Self-Existent If Humane Souls Depend upon the Deity as their Cause then Doubtless Matter also Page 749 750 A Common but Great Mistake That no Pagan Theist ever acknowledged any Creative Power out of Nothing or else That God was the Cause of any Substance Plato's Definition of Effective Power in General and his Affirmation That the Divine Efficiency is that whereby things are Made after they had Not been Certain That he did not understand this of the Production of Souls out of Matter he supposing them to be Before Matter and therefore Made by God out of Nothing Prae-Existing All Philosophers who held the Immortality and Incorporeity of the Soul asserted it to have been Caused by God either in Time or from Eternity Plutarch's Singularity here Vnquestionable That the Platonists supposed One Substance to receive its whole Being from Another in that they derive their Second Hypostasis or Substance though Eternal from the First and their Third from Both and all Inferiour Ranks of Beings from all Three Plotinus Porphyrius Iamblichus Hierocles Proclus and Others derived Matter from the Deity Thus the Chaldee Oracles and the old Egyptian or Hermaick Theology also according to Iamblichus Those Platonists who supposed the World and Souls Eternal conceived them to have received their Being as much from the Deity as if Made in Time Page 750 752 Having now Disproved this Proposition Nothing out of Nothing in the Atheistick Sense viz. That no Substance was Caused or Derived its Being from Another but whatsoever is Substantial did Exist Of It self from Eternity Independently we are in the next place to make it appear also That were it True it would no more oppose Theism then it doth Atheism Falshoods though not Truths may Disagree Plutarch the Stoicks and Others who made God the Creatour of no Substance though not Genuine yet Zealous Theists But the Ancient Atheists both in Plato and Aristotle Generated and Corrupted All things that is Produced All things out of Nothing or Non-Existence and Reduced them into Nothing again the bare Substance of Matter onely Excepted The same done by the Democritick and Epicurean Atheists themselves the Makers of this Objection though according to the Principles of their own Atomick Physiology it is Impossible that Life and Unerstanding Soul and Mind should be meer Modifications of Matter As Theists give a Creative Power of All out of Nothing to the Deity so do Atheists to Passive and Dead Mattâ—r Wherefore this can be no Argument against Theism it Equally opposing Atheism Page 752 756 An Anacephalaeosis wherein Observable That Cicero makes De Nihilo fieri and Sine Causa To be made out of Nothing and to be made without a Cause One and the Self-same thing as also that he doth not Confine this to the Material Cause onely Our Third and Last Undertaking To Prove that Atheists Produce Real Entities out of Nothing in the First Impossible Sense that is Without a Cause Page 756 757 A Brief Synopsis of Atheism That Matter being the onely Substance is therefore the onely Un-made Thing and That whatsoever else is in the World besides the Bare Substance thereof was Made out of Matter or Produced from that alone Page 757 The First Argument When Atheists affirm Matter to be the onely Substance and all things to be Made out of that they Suppose all to be Made without an Efficient Cause which is to bring them from Nothing in an Impossible Sense Though Something may be Made without a Material Cause Prae-Existing yet cannot any thing Possibly be Made without an Efficient Cause Wherefore if there be any thing Made which was Not before there must of Necessity be besides Matter some other Substance as the Active Efficient Cause thereof The Atheistick Hypothesis supposes Things to be Made without any Active or Effective Principle Whereas the Epicurean Atheists Attribute the Efficiency of all to Local Motion and yet deny Matter or Body their onely Substance a Self-moving Power They hereby make all the Motion that is in the World to have been Without a Cause or to Come from Nothing all Action without an Agent all Efficiency without an Efficient Page 758 Again Should we grant these Atheists Motion without a Cause yet could not Dead and Sensless Matter together with Motion ever beget Life Sense and Understanding because this would be Something out of Nothing in way of Causality Local Motion onely Châ—nging the Modifications of Matter as Figure Place Site and Disposition of Parts Hence also those Spurious Theists Confuted who Conclude God to have done no more in the Making of the World then a Carpenter doth in the Building of a House upon this Pretence That Nothing can be made out of Nothing and yet suppose him to Make Souls out of Dead and Sensless Matter which is to bring them from Nothing in way of Causality Page 758 759 Declared before That the Ancient Italicks and Pythagoricks Proved in this manner That Souls could not possibly be Generated out of Matter because Nothing can come from Nothing in way of Causality The Subterfuge of the Atheistick Ionicks out of Aristotle That Matter being the onely Substance and Life Sense and Unâ—erstanding Nothing but the Passions Affections and Dispositions thereof the Production of them out of Matter no Production of any new Reall Entity Page 759 Answer Atheists taking it for granted That there is no other Substance besides Body or Matter therefore falsly conclude Life Sense and Understanding to be Accidents or Modes of Matter they being indeed the Modes or Attributes of Substance Incorporeal and Self-Active A Mode That which cannot be Conceived without the Thing whereof it is a Mode but Life and Cogitation may be Conceived without Corporeal Extension and indeed cannot be Conceived with it Page 759 760 The chief Occasion of this Errour from Qualities and Forms as Because the Quality of Heat and Form of Fire may be Generated out of Matter therefore Life Cogitation and Understanding also But the Atomick Atheists themselves Explode Qualities as things Really distinct from the Figure Site and Motion of Parts for this very reason Because Nothing can be made out of Nothing Causally The Vulgar Opinion of such Real Qualities in Bodies onely from mens mistaking their own Phancies Apparitions Passions Affections and Seemings for things Really Existing without them That in these Qualities which is distinct from the Figure Site and Motion of Parts not the Accidents and Modifications of Matter but of Our own Souls The Atomick Atheists infinitely Absurd when exploding Qualities because Nothing can come out
of Nothing themselves bring Life Sense and Understanding out of Nothing in way of Causality That Opinion Thâ—t Cogitation is Nothing but Local Motion and Men themselves meer Machines Prodigious Sottishness or Intolerable Impudence Page 760 762 Very Observable here That Epicurus himself having a Mind to assert Contingent Liberty confesseth that he could not doe this unlesse there were some such thing in the Principles because Nothing can be made out of Nothing or Caused by Nothing and therefâ—re does he Ridiculously feign a Third Motion of Atoms to salve that Phaenomenon of Free-Will Wherefore he must needs be guilty of an Impossible Production of Something out of Nothing when he brings Soul and Mind out of Dead and Sensless Atoms Were there no Substantial and Eternal Life and Understanding in the Universe there could none have been ever Produced because it must have come from Nothing or been Made without a Cause That Dark Philosophy which Educes not onely Real Qualities and Substantial Forms but also Souls themselves at least Sensitive out of the Power of the Matter Educes them Out of Nothing or Makes them without a Cause and so prepares a direct way to Atheism Page 762 763 They who suppose Matter otherwise then by Motion and by a kind of Miraculous Efficiency to Produce Souls and Minds attribute that Creative Power to this Sensless and Unactive Matter which themselves deny to a Perfect Being as an Absolute Impossibility Thus have we Demonstrated the Impossibility and Nonsense of all Atheism from this very Principle That Nothing can be made from Nothing or without a Sufficient Cause Page 763 764 Wherefore If no Middle betwixt these Two but all things must either Spring from a God or Matter Then is this also a Demonstration of the Truth of Theism by Deduction to Impossible Either there is a God or else all things are derived from Dead and Sensless Matter But this Latter is Impossible Therefore a God Nevertheless that the Existence of a God may be further Directly Proved also from the same Principle rightly understood Nothing out of Nothing Causally or Nothing Caused by Nothing neither Efficiently nor Materially Page 764 By these Steps First That there was never Nothing but Something or other did Exist Of It Self from Eternity Vn-made and Independently upon any thing else Mathematically Certain from this Principle Nothing from Nothing Had there been once Nothing there could never have been Anything Again Whatsoever did Exist Of It Self from Eternity must have so Existed Necessarily and not by any Free-Will and Choice Certain therefore That there is Something Actually in Being whose Existence Is and always Was Necessary Now that which Exists Necessarily Of It Self must have Necessity of Existence in its Nature which Nothing but a Perfect Being hath Therefore there Is a Perfect Being and Nothing Else besides this did Exist Of It Self from Eternity but All other things whatsoever whether Souls or Matter were Made by it To suppose any thing to Exist Of It Self Necessarily that hath no Necessary Existence in its Nature is to suppose that Necessary Existence to have Come from Nothing Page 764 765 Three Reasons why some Theists have been so Staggering and Scepticall about the Necessary Self-Existence of Matter First From an Idiotical Conceit That because Artificiall Things cannot be made by men but Out of Prae-Existent Matter therefore Nothing by God or a Perfect Being can be otherwise Made Secondly Because some of them have supposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Incorporeal Hyle or First Matter Un-made an Opinion Older then Aristotle Whereas this Really Nothing but a Metaphysical Notion of the Potentiality or Possibility of Things respectively to the Deity Lastly Because some of them have conceived Body and Space to be Really the same thing and Space to be Positively Infinite Eternal and Necessarily Existent But if Space be not the Extension of the Deity it Self as some suppose but of Body onely considered Abstractly from This or That and therefore Immoveably then no sufficient Ground for the Positive Infinity or the Indefinity thereof as Cartesius Imagined we being certain of no more then this That be the World and its Space or Extension never so Great yet it might be still Greater and Greater Infinitely for which very Cause it could never be Positively Infinite This Possibility of more Body and Space further and further Indefinitely or Without End as also its Eternity mistaken for Actual Space and Distance Positively Infinite and Eternall Nor is there perhaps any such great Absurdity in the Finiteness of Actual Space and Distance according to this Hypothesis as some conceive Page 765 766 Moreover the Existence of a God may be further proved from this Common Notion Nothing from Nothing Causally not onely because were there no God that Idea which we hâ—ve of a Perfect Being must have Come from Nothing and be the Conception of Nothing but also all the other Intelligible Idea's of our Minds must have Come from Nothing likewise they being not Derived from Sense All Minds and their Intelligible Idea's by way of Participation from One Perfect Omnipotent Being Comprehending it Self Page 766 767 However Certain from this Principle Nothing from Nothing or Nothing Caused by Nothing That Souls and Minds could never have Emerged out of Dead and Sensless Matter or from Figures Sites and Motions and therefore must either have all Existed Of Themselves Necessarily from Eternity or else be Created by the Deity out of Nothing Prae-Existing Concluded That the Existence of a God is altogether as certain as That our Humane Souls did not all Exist from Eternity Of themselves Necessarily Thus is the Second Atheistick Argumentation against Omnipotence or Divine Creation from that False Principle Nothing out of Nothing in the Atheistick Sense which is That Nothing could be brought out of Non-Existence into Being or No Substance derive its Whole Being from another Substance but all was Self-Existent from Eternity abundantly Confuted It having been Demonstrated That unless there be a God or a Perfect Omnipotent Being and Creatour Something must have Come from Nothing in the Impossible Sense that is have been Caused by Nothing or Made without a Cause Page 767 SECT III. THE Six following Atheistick Argumentations driving at these Two things The Disproving First of an Incorporeal and then of a Corporeal Deity next taken all together In way of Answer to which Three Things First To Confute the Atheistick Argumentations against an Incoâ—poreal Deity being the Third and Fourth Secondly To Shew That from the very Principles of the Atheistick Corporealism in their Fifth and Sixth Arguments Incorporeal Substance is Demonstrable And Lastly That therefore the Two following Atheistick Arguments built upon the Contrary Supposition are also Insignificant Page 767 Before we come to the Atheistick Arguments against an Incorporeal Deity Premised That though all Corporealists be not Atheists yet Atheists universally meer Corporealists Thus Plato in his Sophist writing of those who maintained That Nature Generated all
All is Body and That the First Principles of Body are devoid of Life and Understanding it would follow unavoidably That there is no God Therefore the Stoicks who were Corporeal Theists denied the Latter they supposing an Understanding Fire Eternal and Unmade the Maker of the whole Mundane System Truly Observed by Origen That this Corporeal God of the Stoicks was but by Accident Incorruptible and Happy and onely because Wanting a Destroyer This no Genuine Theism Page 837 838 But an Absolute Impossibility in both these Atheistick Corporealisms not onely because they suppose no Active Principle but also because they bring Life and Understanding that is Something out of Nothing or Make them without a Cause Where the Atomick Atheists of the Two most to be Condemned because so grosly Contradicting themselves From that True Principle That Matter as such is devoid of Life and Understanding an Absolute Necessity of another Substance Incorporeal which is Essentially Vital and Intellectual That All Life cannot possibly be Factitious and Accidental Generable and Corruptible but there must be Substantial Life and also some Eternal Page 838 839 The Truth of this Vnderstood and Acknowledged by the Hylozoists That there must of Necessity be both Substantial and Unmade Life and Understanding who therefore Attribute the same to all Matter as such but without Animality which according to them is all Factitious and Accidental Wherefore this Hylozoick Atheism also brings Conscious Life and Animality out of Nothing or Makes them without a Cause The Argument of the Epicurean Atheists against Stratonism or Hylozoism Unanswerable That upon this Supposition there must be in every Man and Animal a Heap of Innumerable Percipients as many as there are Atoms of Matter and so no One Thinker The Pretence of the Hylozoists That all the Particles of Matter in every Animal do Confederate Ridiculous and Impossible Page 839 840 Thus the Fifth and Sixth Atheistick Argumentations fully Confuted and from that True Supposition in them That Matter as such is Devoid of Life and Understanding Incorporeal Substance plainly Demonstrated Which was our Second Undertaking Page 840 The Third and Last That there being Vndeniably Substance Incorporeal the Two Following Atheistick Argumentations built upon the Supposition of the Contrary altogether Insignificant The Seventh not properly directed against Theism but against a Religious kind of Atheism or Theogonism which supposed a God or Soul of the World Generated out of Sensless Matter and the Offspring of Night and Chaos A Sober and True Sense of the World's Animation That there is a Living Sentient and Understanding Nature Presiding over the whole World But the Sense of Pagan Theists That the Whole Corporeall World Animated is a God Exploded by us This Argument therefore being not against Theism but Theogonism the Confutation thereof might be here well Omitted without any Detriment to our Cause But because the denying of a Living Understanding Nature presiding over the World is Atheisticall the Ground of this Assertion briefly Declared That Life and Understanding are Accidents of Bodies resulting onely from Such a Contexture of Atoms as produce Flesh Bloud and Brains in Bodies Organized and That there is no Reason to be found any-where but onely in Humane Form which also Confuted A Brutish Passage of a Modern Writer That it is Vnconceivable by Men How God can Understand without Brains Page 840 841 The Next which is the Eighth Atheistick Argumentation That there can be no Living Being Immortall nor Perfectly Happy built upon that False Supposition also That all Life and Understanding results from a Contexure of Dead and Sensless Atoms and therefore is Dissolvible and Annihilable But that there is Life Essentiall and Substantiall which Naturally Immortall as also a Necessity of an Eternall Life and Mind Unmade and Unannihilable which Perfectly Happy Page 841 842 SECT IV. THE Epicurean Atheists further Endeavour to Disprove a God from the Phaenomena of Motion and Cogitation in the Three Following Argumentations the Ninth Tenth and Eleventh From Motion thus That from this Principle Nothing can move It Self but Whatsoever is Moved is moved by Another it will follow That there can be no First Cause and Unmoved Mover but One thing Moved Another from Eternity Infinitely Because Nothing could Move Another which was not It Self First Moved by Something else Page 842 843 Answer The meaning of this Axiome Not That Nothing can Act from It Self as the Atheist Supposes he taking it for granted that every Thing is Body and that all Action is Locall Motion but That no Body Resting could ever Locally Move It Self A False Supposition of the Atheists and some Cartesians That were there but once Motion in the Matter this would of it Self continue to all Eternity True that of Aristotle That to make an Infinite Progress in the Causes of Motion and no First Mover is all one as to say That there is No Cause at all thereof or That all the Motion in the World is a Passion without an Agent or Comes from Nothing Clearly Impossible That there should be any Motion at all were there Nothing Self-Moving or Self-Active Page 843 Wherefore from this Principle That no Body can Move It Self it follows Vndeniably That there is Some other Substance in the World besides Body that hath an Active Power of Moving Body Page 843 844 Another Corollary from the same Principle That there is another Species of Action distinct from Locall Motion and which is not Heterokinesy but Autokinesy That the Action by which Local Motion is first Caused could not be it self Local Motion All Local Motion Caused Originally by Cogitation Thus the Ninth Atheistick Argument from Motion Confuted and from hence That no Body can Move it Self Demonstrated That there is Something Incorporeal the First Cause of Local Motion by Cogitation ibid. But the Atheists further Pretend to Prove That Cogitation it self is Heterokinesy the Passion of the Thinker and the Action of some other External Agent upon him Because Nothing taketh Beginning from It Self and No Cogitation can rise of It Self without a Cause That therefore Thinking Beings themselves are Machines and Cogitation Local Motion And No Understanding Being a First Cause nor Perfectly Happy because Dependent upon something else Page 844 845 Answer True That no Substance taketh Beginning from it Self as also That no Action Causeth it Self But False That No Action taketh Beginning from the Immediate Agent or That Nothing can Act otherwise then as Acted upon by Something else Atheists here Affirm onely what they should Prove and so Beg the Question If Nothing Self-Active then all the Motion and Action in the Universe must Come from Nothing or be Made without a Cause Page 845 True also That our Humane Cogitations are frequently occasioned from Externall Objects and that the Concatenations of Thoughts and Phantasms often depend upon Mechanick Causes But False That all Cogitations are Obtruded upon us from without and That no Transition in our Thoughts which was not
Love the First Created God or Lower Soul of the World before whose Production Necessity is said to have reigned that is the Necessity of Material Motions undirected for Ends and Good Page 374 375. That Pythagoras called the Supreme Deity not onely a Monad but a Tetrad or Tetractys also The Reasons for this given from the Mysteries in the Number Four trifling More probability of a late Conjecture that the Pythagorick Tetractys was the Hebrew Tetragrammaton not altogether unknown to the Hetrurians and Latins Page 375 376 Xenophanes a plain Asserter both of Many Gods and of One God called by him One and All. Simplicius his clear Testimony for this Theosophy of Xenophanes out of Theophrastus Xenophanes misrepresented by Aristotle as an Asserter of a Spherical Corporeal God Page 377 378 Heraclitus though a Cloudy and Confounded Philosopher and one who could not conceive of any thing Incorporeal yet both a hearty Moralist and a zealous Asserter of One Supreme Deity Page 378 379 The Ionick Philosophers before Anaxagoras being all of them Corporealists and some of them Atheists that Anaxagoras was the First who asserted an Incorporeal Mind to be a Principle and though not the Cause of Matter yet of Motion and of the Regularity of things The World according to him not Eternal but Made and out of Pre-Existent Similar Atoms and that not by Chance but by Mind or God This Mind of his purely Incorporeal as appeareth from his own words cited by Simplicius Page 380 Probable that Anaxagoras admitted none of the Inferiour Pagan Gods He Condemned by the Vulgar for an Atheist because he Ungodded the Stars denying their Animation and affirming the Sun to be but a Mass of Fire and the Moon an Earth This disliked also by Plato as that which in those times would dispose men to Atheism Page 381 Anaxagoras farther Censured both by Plato and Aristotle because though asserting Mind to be a Principle he made much more use of Material than of Mental and Final Causes which was looked upon by them as an Atheistick Tang in him Nevertheless Anaxagoras a better Theist than those Christian Philosophers of later times who quite banish all Mental Causality from the World Page 382 383 XXI Parmenides his acknowledgment of One God the Cause of Gods Which Supreme Deity by Parmenides styled One-All-Immovable That this is not to be taken Physically but Metaphysically and Theologically Proved at large The First Principle of all to these Ancients One a Simple Vnity or Monad This said to be All because virtually Containing All and Distributed into All or because All things are distinctly displayed from it Lastly the same said to be Immovable and Indivisible and without Magnitude to distinguish it from the Corporeal Universe Page 383 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One All taken in different Senses by Parmenides and Xenophanes c. Divinely for the Supreme Deity One most Simple Being the Original of all things but by others in Aristotle Atheistically as if all things were but One and the same Matter diversly Modified But the One-All of these Latter not Immoveable but Moveable it being nothing else but Body whereas the One-All-Immoveable is an Incorporeal Deity This does Aristotle in his Metaphysicks close with as good Divinity That there is one Incorporeal Immoveable Principle of all things Simplicius his Observation That though divers Philosophers maintained a Plurality or Infinity of Moveable Principles yet none ever asserted more than One Immoveable Page 385 386 Parmenides in Plato distinguishes three Divine Hypostases The First whereof called by him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One-All the Second 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One All things and the Third 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One and All things Page 386 c. But that Parmenides by his One-All-Immoveable really understood the Supreme Deity yet farther unquestionably evident from the Verses cited out of him by Simplicius Wherein there is also attributed thereunto a Standing Eternity or Duration different from that of Time Page 388 The onely Difference betwixt Parmenides and Melissus that the Former called his One-All-Immoveable Finite the Latter Infinite this in Words rather than Reality The Disagreeing Agreement of these two Philosophers fully declared by Simplicius Melissus his Language more agreeable with our present Theology Though Anaximander's Infinite were nothing but Sensless Matter yet Melissus his Infinite was the True Deity Page 389 That Zeno Eleates by his One-All-Immoveable meant not the Corporeal World neither no more than Melissus Parmenides and Xenophanes but the Deity evident from Aristotle Zeno's Demonstrations of One God from the Idea of a most Powerfull and Perfect Being in the same Aristotle Page 390 Empedocles his First Principle of All things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or a Unity likewise besides which he supposed Contention and Friendship to be the Principles of all Created Beings not onely Plants Brutes and Men but Gods also Page 391 c. Empedocles his Original of all the Evill both of Humane Soul and Demons from this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Discord and Contention together with the Ill use of their Liberty Page 393 XXII The Doctrine of divers other Pythagoreans also the same as Philolaus Archytas Ocellus Aristaeus c. Timaeus Locrus his God the Creatour of Gods Onatus his Many Gods and his One God the Coryphaeus of the Gods Euclides Megarensis his One the Very Good Antisthenes his Many Popular Gods but One Natural God Diogenes Sinopensis his God that Filleth all things Page 393 c. XXIII That Socrates asserted One Supreme God undenyable from Xenophon Page 398 399 But that he disclaimed all the other Inferiour Gods of the Pagans and died as a Martyr for One onely God in this Sense a Vulgar Errour Page 400 What the Impiety imputed to him by his Adversaries appeareth from Plato's Euthyphro viz. That he freely and openly Condemned those Fables of the Gods wherein Wicked and Vnjust Actions were imputed to them Page 401 That Plato really asserted One onely God and no more a Vulgar Errour likewise and that Thirteenth Epistle to Dionysius wherein he declared himself to be Serious onely when he began his Epistles with God and not with Gods though exstant in Eusebius his time Spurious and Supposititious He worshipping the Sun and other Stars also supposed to be animated as Inferiour Gods Page 402 Nevertheless Vndeniably evident that Plato was no Polyarchist but a Monarchist no Asserter of Many Independent Gods or Principles but of One Original of all things One First God One Greatest God One Maker of the World and of the Gods Page 403 404 In what Sense the Supreme God to Plato the Cause and Producer of Himself out of Plotinus and this notion not onely entertained by Seneca and Plotinus but also by Lactantius That Plato really asserted a Trinity of Universal Divine Hypostases that have the Nature of Principles The First Hypostasis in Plato's Trinity properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Original Deity the Cause and King of all things which
also said by him to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Above Essence Page 407 Xenophon though with other Pagans he acknowledged a Plurality of Gods yet a plain Asserter also of One Supreme and Universal Numen Page 408 XXIV Aristotle a frequent Acknowledger of Many Gods And whether he believed any Demons or no which he sometimes mentions though sparingly and insinuates them to be a kind of Aerial Animals more Immortal than Men yet did he unquestionably look upon the Starrs or their Intelligences as Gods Page 408 c. Notwithstanding which Aristotle doth not onely often speak of God Singularly and of the Divinity Emphatically but also professedly opposes that Imaginary Opinion of Many Independent Principles or Unmade Deities He confuting the same from the Phenomena or the Compages of the World which is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but all Uniform and agreeably Conspiring into one Harmony Page 410 411 Aristotle's Supreme Deity the First Immoveable Mover The difference here betwixt Plato and Aristotle Plato's Original of Motion a Self-moving Soul Aristotle's an Immoveable Mind But this Difference not so great as at first sight it seems because Aristotle's Immoveable Mind doth not Move the Heavens Efficiently but onely Finally or As being Loved Besides which he must needs suppose another immediate Mover which could be nothing but a Soul of them Page 412 Aristotle's Immoveable Mind not onely the Cause of Motion but also of Well and Fit all the Order Pulchritude and Harmony that is in the world Called therefore by Aristotle the Separate Good thereof This together with Nature its Subordinate Instrument the Efficient Cause of the whole Mundane System which however Co-eternal with it yet is in Order of Nature Junior to it Page 413 414 Aristotle and other Ancients when they affirm Mind to have been the Cause of all things Vnderstood it thus That all things were made by an Absolute Wisedom and after the Best Manner The Divine Will according to them not a meer Arbitrary Humoursome and Fortuitous thing but Decency and Fitness it self Page 415 From this passage of Aristotle's That the Divinity is either God or the Work of God Evident that he supposed All the Gods to have been derived from One and therefore his Intelligences of the Sphears Page 415 That according to Aristotle this Speculation of the Deity constitutes a Particular Science by it self distinct from Physiology and Geometry the Former whereof Physiology is Conversant about what was Inseparable and Movable the Second Geometry about things Immovable but not Really Separable but the Third and Last which is Theology about that which is both Immovable and Separable an Incorporeal Deity Page 416 Four Chief Points of Aristotle's Theology or Metaphysicks concerning God First that though all things are not Eternal and Unmade yet something must needs be such as likewise Incorruptible or otherwise all might come to Nothing Secondly that God is an Incorporeal Substance separate from Sensibles Indivisible and devoid of Parts and Magnitude Thirdly that the Divine Intellect is the same with its Intelligibles or conteineth them all within it self because the Divine Mind being Senior to all things and Architectonical of the World could not then look abroad for its Objects without it self The contrary to which supposed by Atheists Lastly that God being an Immovable Substance his Act and Energy is his Essence from whence Aristotle would infer the Eternity of the World Page 416 417 Aristotle's Creed and Religion contained in these Two Articles first That there is a Divinity which comprehends the whole Nature or Universe And Secondly that besides this There are other Particular Inferiour Gods But that all other things in the Religion of the Pagans were Fabulously superadded hereunto for Political Ends. Page 417 Speusippus Xenocrates and Theophrastus Monarchists Page 418 XXV The Stoicks no better Metaphysicians than Heraclitus in whose footsteps they trode admitting of no Incorporeal Substance The Qualities of the Mind also to these Stoicks Bodies Page 419 420 But the Stoicks not therefore Atheists they supposing an Eternal Unmade Mind though lodged in Matter the Maker of the whole Mundane System Page 420 The Stoical Argumentations for a God not Inconsiderable and what they were Page 421 422 The Stoical God not a meer Plastick and Methodical but an Intellectual Fire The World according to them not a Plant but Animal and Jupiter the Soul thereof From the supposed Oneliness of which Jupiter they would sometimes inferre the Singularity of the World Plutarch on the Contrary affirming that though there were Fifty or an Hundred Worlds yet would there be for all that but one Zeus or Jupiter Page 423 Nevertheless the Stoicks as Polytheistical as any Sect. But so as that they supposed all their Gods save One to be not Onely Native but also Mortal made out of that One and resolved into that One again these Gods being all Melted into Jupiter in the Conflagration Page 424 425 Wherefore during the Intervals of Successive Worlds the Stoicks acknowledged but one Solitary Deity and no more Jupiter being then left all alone and the other Gods Swallowed up into him Who therefore not onely the Creatour of all the other Gods but also the Decreatour of them Page 425 426 The Stoicks notwithstanding this Religious Worshippers of their Many Gods and thereby sometime derogated from the Honour of the Supreme by sharing his Sovereignty amongst them Page 426 427 Nevertheless the Supreme God praised and extolled by them far above all the other Gods and acknowledged to be the Sole Maker of the World Page 427 c. Their Professing Subjection to his Laws as their greatest Liberty Page 430 And to submit their Wills to his Will in every thing so as to know no other Will but the Will of Jupiter ibid. Their Pretending to Look to God and to doe nothing without a Reference to him as also to Trust in him and Rely upon him Page 431 Their Praising him as the Authour of all Good ibid. Their Addressing their Devotions to him Alone without the conjunction of any other God and particularly imploring his Assistence against Temptations Page 432 Cleanthes his Excellent and Devout Hymn to the Supreme God Page 433 XXVI Cicero though affecting to write in the way of the New Academy yet no Sceptick as to Theism Nor was he an Asserter of Many Independent Deities Cicero's Gods the Makers of the World the same with Plato's Eternal Gods or Trinity of Divine Hypostases Subordinate This Language the Pagans in S. Cyrill would Justifie from that of the Scripture Let us make Man Page 434 435 c. Varro's Threefold Theology The Fabulous the Natural and the Civil or Popular agreeably to Scaevola the Pontifex his Three Sorts of Gods Poetical Pholosophical and Political The Former condemned by him as False the Second though True said to be above the Capacity of the Vulgar and therefore a Necessity of a Third or Middle betwixt both Because many things True in